Tagged: ” 2011 Legislature

Posted: October 7, 2011 at 12:10 pm

Montana Republicans Unveil 2012 Campaign Priorities

In a series of guest editorials in the state’s largest papers, Republicans today unveiled the most revealing look yet at how the party would lead if it regains control of the Montana Legislature in 2012.

The rising stars of the “Grand Old Party” have developed an 800-word treatise, complete with florid language addressing “mothers, daughters, fathers, sons, grandparents, cousins, friends, rivals” and deep philosophical questions on what Republicans believe to be life’s most pressing issues.

So of course, the GOP features the shining example of the 2011 session’s focus on irresponsible extremist ideology and frivolous nonsense:  Spear hunting.

GOP headquarters has been pushing the op-ed out on email, Facebook, Twitter etc, so it appears to be of central importance to the Republican party.   As to why the party is focusing on this kind of agenda…that isn’t hard to figure out.   Facing a hurricane-force political backlash post-session, the GOP certainly had the incentive to shy away from their lack of job creating proposals in order to leave opponents a smaller target at which to shoot.  But based on the latest reactions to their grand announcement, it looks like the spear has once again missed the mark.

Welcome to the land of nutters, the Montana Legislature.

Posted: September 24, 2011 at 8:17 am

A Look at 2012′s Packed Ballot

There are no less than five citizen initiative proposals that Montanans are trying to get on the ballot though signature gathering campaigns.  This is in addition to the five bad ideas that TEA Party Republicans sent to the ballot to be voted on in 2012.

While people have a general impression that ballot initiatives “are good for turnout,” that’s actually not the case.  Studies have shown time again that while the ability to legislate from the ballot could impact turnout in midterm elections, but it has little or no effect during presidential elections like 2012.

The sheer number of initiatives on the ballot is what is interesting here. There are, so far, ten measures that could be on the ballot.  Five were referred by the legislature, and five are proposed by citizens who must first the signatures necessary.  The general rule of thumb is that the more measures on the ballot, the more likely people are to vote no.  This is partly because people would rather vote for the status quo (vote no) then vote to support something they feel they don’t have enough information on to make a decision.

In this case, since the initiatives are mostly (but not all) bad, this could work in progressives’ favor.  Take a look at what the TEA Party Republicans in the 2011 legislature put on the ballot.:
·    Denying services to undocumented immigrants
·    Gutting the right to medical privacy for women
·    Prohibiting the federal government from enforcing the individual mandate of the ACA
·    Politicizing the election of supreme court justices by district instead of statewide, and
·    Dismantling state government by requiring that money not appropriated by the legislature not be available to future legislatures

This final one might be the worst of the lot.  It would mean that even if there is a large budget surplus like the hundreds of millions we have now, and even if we vote to change the legislature to elect people that will use the surplus the fix the problems caused by the past legislature’s underfunding, our votes won’t matter.    The funding will be sent back to Exxon-Mobil, et al.  Your voice would be silenced.

Here’s an overview of what citizens are trying to get on the ballot–the entire list of proposed initiatives and legislative referenda can be found on the Secretary of State’s web site:

Jury Nullification
This is a proposal to allow juries to say, “the person is guilty, but we don’t like the law so we refuse to convict her.” If you believe that laws should be made under established, open and transparent and visible procedures (and in legislatures accountable to the electorate), you’re probably opposed to this idea.

It’s being pushed by Roger Roots, who the Montana Human Rights Network calls a “racist activist with Montana connections.” The Network became very familiar with Roots when he sued them for $3.7 million for libel in 1994. Roots lost. The Network reports that in 1996, Roger Roots held a rally with Rudy Stanko, a reverend for the racist World Church of the Creator.  Roots is listed as a contributing writer for the racist publication known as “The Jubilee.”

Abortion Ban
This has already failed twice to garner enough support to get on the ballot. In fact, it’s never even come close.  Still, there is no reasoning with fanatics. Despite the fact that according to the most recent polling, 78% of Americans want abortion to remain legal.

Medical Marijuana and Eminent Domain
Here’s where this gets interesting.  These campaigns are both attempts to block two bills passed by the legislature from becoming law.  The first is the unpopular Senate Bill 423, the Jeff Essmann medical marijuana disaster which passed with a veto-proof majority after the legislature voted down a slate of amendatory vetoes. The other is the new eminent domain bill, House Bill 198.

The medical marijuana campaign is expected to get enough signatures by the September 30th deadline.  The eminent domain bill is still uncertain.  Neither issue breaks down along traditional party lines lines. For example, those in favor of green energy and wind power may support the new eminent domain law because it allows transmission lines-the only way to get green energy to market.

On the other hand some environmentalists oppose it because they don’t want the line going through certain areas or because they see it as an increase in corporate power. Conservatives are also divided on the issue. TEA partiers like Art Wittich support the campaign to block the law, while other Republicans want to keep the new law in place.   The web site of the campaign to block the new eminent domain law can be viewed here,  and the site of the campaign to block the new medical marijuana law can be viewed here.

Legalization of Marijuana
Though this initiative has the odd title, “Constitutional right to alcohol and marijuana,”  apparently it is an attempt to get the state to legalize marijuana and treat it like alcohol.

Make it Harder for the Legislature to Change Initiatives
Finally, the initiative to “reserve to the people the power to amend or repeal laws passed by initiative” is a measure that the Billings Gazette reports would require the legislature to send changes or repeal of citizen’s initiatives back to the voters.

Posted: April 9, 2011 at 10:19 pm

House Speaker Susceptible to Napoleon Complex

The brand of Republican House Speaker Mike Milburn (R-Cascade) is significantly smaller than Gov. Schweitzer’s, and appears sort of…ineffectual.
Schweitzer's veto brand.
Milburn jobs brand.

Posted: December 20, 2010 at 5:24 pm

“Establishment” GOP vs.TEA Party Legislators: Fight Set for January 3rd Starts Early

Roger Koopman Speaks at a Ron Paul RallyThe session hasn’t even started and tensions that have been bubbling behind closed doors are flaring up publicly now between ultra-far-right wingers, on one side, and your run-of-the-mill conservative Republicans on the other.

In a press release entitled “Is the conservative mandate derailed before leaving the station?” former GOP legislator Roger Koopman, of Bozeman, fired the first public attack on the “Republican Establishment” over the lack of leadership bones thrown to the GOP’s hard-right ideologues given the fact that the TEA Party delivered the GOP a “a powerful conservative mandate” in the November elections.

Judging by who received plum leadership positions, Koopman is part right and part wrong.  Wing nut appointees include Krayton Kearns (House Ag), Ted Washburn (House FWP) and David Howard (House HHS).  Those guys are RWNJs all the way.  So the question is, is Koopman trying just to get attention for himself, or does he honestly believe that these yahoos are somehow not conservative enough?  Koopman ends the rant by calling for a separate TEA Party caucus of truly “principled” conservatives:

If there is any hope for conservative Montanans in the coming legislature, it will come from a highly organized, principled group of Republican legislators who will simply not allow the conservative mandate of November 2 to be stolen from them.

The best part, you might recall, is that Koopman was caught sucking off the government tit a while back, and basically got cited by the state for using public resources to line his own pockets.

Posted: July 8, 2010 at 7:33 pm

Foreign lobbying efforts yield new influence over MT Republican legislator

I don’t get it.  You have to be a Montana resident to collect signatures for a ballot initiative, but you don’t even have to be an American citizen to get a Republican in the Montana Legislature to introduce a bill for you?

Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the so-called “Euthanasia Prevention Coalition,” of Canada, has enlisted Montana State Senator Greg Hinkle (R-Thompson Falls) to introduce what legislators call “a bill in search of a problem” that Montana doesn’t even have.

A quick look at the Canadian’s site reveals his intentions to impose his policy goals in other states and other countries as well.

Dear Mr. Shadenberg,

We have a saying here in Montana that goes something like this: Good fences make good neighbors.  If you don’t like the laws in your country, feel free to lobby to change them.  But here in Montana we don’t take too kindly to foreigners who attempt to impose their wishes on the citizens of other free nations.   Even if some of our local Republican legislators don’t seem to understand, when it comes to Montana laws, it is the opinion of Montana citizens that they should regard.

Dear Sen. Hinkle,

Canada is not in your district.