Rep. Knudsen loses his job over bills that irked the oil and gas industry

Culbertson Republican Rep. Austin Knudsen lost his job at the O’Toole Law Firm in Plentywood last session in part because he sponsored two pieces of legislation that were opposed by the oil and gas industry.

Emails between Board of Oil and Gas Conservation administrator Tom Richmond and Dave Galt, executive director of the Montana Petroleum Association, indicate that Larry O’Toole, Knudsen’s boss, planned to fire the junior law partner due to Knudsen’s support of a pair of measures aimed at giving landowners and mineral rights owners greater protections.

The emails, which were obtained by the Montana Environmental Information Center, stated that Larry O’Toole was watching a House committee hearing on House Bill 406 and and House Bill 431 at the Board of Oil and Gas Conservation offices in Billings when he told board geologist Jim Halvorson that Knudsen, an attorney, may be looking for a new job.

In a Feb. 19 email Richmond wrote to Galt:

“Larry O’Toole sat with Jim (Halvorson) Friday and watched the law partner’s (Knudsen) performance during these two hearings on the Internet in Jim’s office….said law partner maybe hanging out his own shingle pretty soon!....Larry said almost all of the people testifying in favor were relatives of the Representative….O’Toole Law Firm not pleased.”

Richmond followed up later saying that Loren O’Toole, Larry’s father, called Larry during the hearing to tell him:

“he needs to fire Austin.”

O’Toole did not return phone calls seeking comment on the email exchange.

The O’Toole Law Firm is one of only a handful of law firms in the state that handles complex oil and gas cases before the Board of Oil and Gas Conservation. Knudsen said Larry O’Toole represents many clients in the oil and gas industry.

Knudsen confirmed that O’Toole asked him for his resignation shortly after the committee hearing on the two bills.

“The fact is I ran a couple of bills that were perceived as anti-oil industry and it upset some people,” Knudsen said.

Knudsen, seen by many political watchers as a rising star in the Republican Party, was elected to the leadership by his caucus and in January GOP leaders tapped him for the high-profile job of responding to Democratic Gov. Steve Bullock’s state of the state speech.

Unconfirmed rumors of Knudsen’s firing reverberated throughout the Capitol during the Legislative session, but the incident never made headlines.

Knudsen said he previously thought O’Toole asked him for his resignation because of the burden his legislative service put on the firm. Knudsen said he heard the rumors, but he said he didn’t know they were true until he learned last week of the email exchange uncovered by MEIC.

“Me serving in the Legislature for two sessions was very tough on the firm,” Knudsen said. “It was just Larry and I and when you’ve got me spending four or five months out of the year in Helena not doing work and doing legislative stuff, it’s tough on business,” Knudsen said. “As far as I knew that was the reason because that was the conversation Larry and I had.”

The two bills Knudsen sponsored had to do with oil and gas development impacts on surface rights owners and “forced pooling” of mineral rights holders.

HB431 would have required any damages from oil and gas development on surface owner’s land be calculated based on the “best reasonably available use” of the land. Previously most damage calculations were primarily based on agricultural uses.

The second bill, HB406, would have reduced the penalties and increased the royalty payments for mineral rights owners who are “force pooled.” Under Montana law mineral rights owners who are unwilling to lease their mineral rights are barred from preventing other mineral rights owners in the same tract from developing their mineral rights. Those who refuse to sign leases are “force pooled” meaning they are given an average mineral lease, and an eighth of the share of the working oil drilling operation’s royalties. They are forced to pay out of those royalties a penalty that helps cover part of the costs of the working interest.

HB406 would have reduced those penalties and increased the royalties for mineral rights owners who were forced into a pool. The measure would have made Montana law similar to current laws in neighboring North Dakota.

“There a lot of oil and gas exploration going on in my district. My family has had to deal with these issues. I’ve got neighbors and constituents who have had to deal with these issues. There gets to be a lot of tension and a lot of landowner problems,” Knudsen said. “Right now we’ve got statutes in place that protect those landowners and requires them to be compensated for damages, but the statute is very week and sometimes they are completely ignored by the companies.”

Both measures were opposed by the Montana Petroleum Association. HB431 was amended and eventually passed both houses and a conference committee before Gov. Steve Bullock signed it into law. HB406, which faced more vehement opposition by the industry, died in committee.

Galt said he worked with Knudsen to amend HB431, but he said the industry feared that HB406 would become an incentive for mineral rights owners to not sign reasonable lease offers from developers.

“It changes the whole economic well,” Galt said. “It was a big deal to us. These bills were huge deals and they were of great concern.”

Galt said he had nothing to do with Knudsen’s firing and he said he didn’t know anything about it until he received that email from Richmond.

“I did not have any conversation with the O’Tooles, Larry or Loren, and I do not know of anybody in the industry who did,” Galt said. “When I heard this happened I went and talked to Austin and I told him that. I thought it was an unfortunate situation. I don’t operate like that and I don’t believe that’s the right way to operate. I told him that.”

For his party Richmond said he regretted passing along the information to Galt via email. Richmond said the board did not take a position on either bill, but rather kept track of where various interests lined up in support or opposition. Richmond said he sent the email to Galt because it illustrated the heated passions on both sides of the issue.

“I think at the time we were just kind of concerned about where the bill was going, and who was supporting it and who was opposing it,” Richmond said. “I think it was a matter of passing the knowledge along so people would know where people stood.”

Richmond said it was “unfortunate” that O’Toole made the comments about firing Knudsen while in the board’s Billings office.

“It’s an unfortunate thing that that happened in our office, and I shouldn’t have spread the rumor any further than that,” Richmond said. “We were just trying to keep track back and forth who had a position and what their position was.”

Derf Johnson, MEIC’s assistant program director and the man who uncovered the emails through a freedom of information request, said he was deeply troubled to learn that a sitting legislator had lost his job because of his position on legislation.

Though MEIC supported HB431 and HB406, Johnson said the environmental group was not happy with Knudsen’s overall record on the environment. However, Johnson said Knudsen got a “raw deal.”

“It was incredibly alarming that the sponsor of a bill that would have impacted the oil and gas industry lost his job. That would be my most immediate concern with the emails,” Johnson said. “To me it suggests that there was some political retribution for stance he took at the Legislature and for supporting bills important to his constituents.”

Johnson said he requested the emails because he wanted to better understand the relationship between the Board of Oil and Gas Conservation and the industry it regulates during the legislative process. He said the 63 pages of emails demonstrates a maybe too-friendly relationship between the industry and its primary regulating entity.

“We certainly don’t have the kind of access to the Board of Oil and Gas that the industry does. I think these emails show that,” Johnson said.

Knudsen, who is working on his own and helping out with his family’s farm, said he is not surprised to learn that his dismissal from the O’Toole Law Firm was related to his support of those two measures.

“I knew there was going to be resistance to these bills, especially from the industry,” Knudsen said. “I’m not out to stick it to the industry, but these are issues I’m passionate about. I dealt with them it personally in my family and I’ve dealt with it with my neighbors and my clients. When you’ve got a section of code that’s meant to protect the surface owners and there’s no teeth tho it, well then I think we’ve got a problem. That’s why I brought the bill.”

Read the full email exchange in DocumentCloud online at www.greatfallstribune.com.

Last-minute Senate GOP maneuvering threatening to derail budget deal

Everyone wants to know what’s going on, but even we the press know very little about the last-minute tactic by the Senate GOP to try to force Gov. Steve Bullock back to the negotiating table.

What we know is this:

Last night legislative leaders and the Governor’s office worked late into the night to hammer out a deal that would satisfy the Republican leadership in both houses.

The headlines this morning proclaimed that Bullock and lawmakers hashed out the plan.

The House convened, finished up their third reading business, said goodbye and adjourned Sine Die.

The Senate then went into session, worked through the first board of business, then came back and voted on a motion to suspend the rules so that the Senate could accept Senate Bill 410. They needed a 2/3 majority because the measure missed transmittal deadline.

The amendments in SB410 are the deal. The measure contains an additional $13.5 million in spending on top of the $10 billion two-year budget bill. The $13.5 million includes spending for corrections, DPHHS,  and commerce.

The Senate voted 27-23 to suspend the rules, but that doesn’t get them the 2/3 majority needed. So the deal, essentially, was not accepted by the Senate.

After that happened, the Senate recessed and Republican Senate Majority Leader Art Wittich, Sen. Jason Priest, R-Red Lodge, and Sen. Jon Sesso, D-Butte (and lawmakers, staffers, political hacks, and press) went into the Senate cloak room and had an impromptu debate about the negotiations.

Sesso told Wittich and Priest that the deal was a good faith deal, approved by the House, and that by voting against adopting SB410 they were essentially breaking the deal.

Priest and Wittich told Sesso that their “interests were not represented at the table.” However, Priest was intimately involved in the writing the SB410 amendments last night. Everyone I talk to said Priest was in House Speaker Mark Basdel’s office working closely on the negotiations.

Sen. Dave Lewis, R-Helena, claimed that Senate President Jeff Essmann was not in the negotiations and therefore the Senate Leadership’s interests were “not represented.” But Sen. Rick Ripley, Chairman of the Senate Finance and Claims Committee disputed that, as did several other Republican lawmakers from the House and Senate who were in the Senate chambers.

Whether Essmann was involved in the negotiations or not is really not relevant, because its clear to everyone at the Capitol that Jason Priest is the Senate GOP point man on the Ledership’s negotiating team. Priest even told reporters that he’s in charge of any negotiations.

Here’s what’s happening as I write this:

The Senate still sits in recess.

Essmann is sitting in a chair at the front of the Senate. He doesn’t appear to be active in this process.

Wittich is posted outside House Speaker Blasdel’s office with a Senate leadership staffer and a GOP operative.

Blasdel, I’m told, has left the building.

Sesso in nowhere to be found.

Bullock is in a cabinet meeting, and the press is locked out.

Jim Molloy, Bullock’s senior advisor, told the press “there will be no negotiations.”

I’m told Blasdel is furious about what just went down in the Senate. My sources tell me Blasdel felt that the Senate’s actions violated the deal that was carefully crafted last night. He was especially incensed, I’m told, about the notion that Priest, Wittich and Essmann were somehow uninformed about the deal. I don’t know if that’s true, because Blasdel is nowhere to be found.

Wittich told me that Priest was involved in the negotiations, but that some changes took place after the Senate GOP leaders stepped away from the table. When SB410 came over the Senate it was not deal that was agreed to, Wittich claims.

Priest and Wittich refuse to tell the press what they want from the Governor’s office.

Bullock appears unwilling to engage the Senate GOP in negotiations, so it could come down to the Senate killing SB410 by not suspending the rules, then Bullock vetoes HB2 because the deal was broken.

If they don’t get this resolved today then the House, which already adjourned would have to come back. One House of the Legislature cannot adjourn Sine Die without the other House until after Day 88. We’re on Day 87, so if this doesn’t get resolved today, we’re back here tomorrow. And if it doesn’t get resolved then, well… then we’re back here for a special session.

Update: I just got more details on the Sine Die law:

In the Constitution it states:

Neither house shall, without the consent of the other, adjourn or recess for more than three days or to any place other than that in which the two houses are sitting.

But – Joint Rule 20-10. Consent for adjournment or recess:

As required by Article V, section 10(5), of the Montana Constitution, the consent of the other house is required for adjournment or recess for more than 3 calendar days. Consent for adjournment is obtained by having the house wishing to adjourn send a message to the other house and having the receiving house vote favorably on the request.

The receiving house shall inform the requesting house of its consent or lack of consent. Consent is not required on or after the 87th legislative day.

Since day 87 is burned – the three days runs us through day 90.

Open party caucuses? Yeah, they’re pretty much a joke.

In 1995 22 news organizations – including newspapers, television and radio stations and trade and professional news associations – sued the Montana Legislature to open all Republican and Democratic House and Senate caucuses.

In 1998 District Judge Thomas Honzel ruled in favor of the news media and declared all legislative caucus meetings must be open to the public.

“Clearly, legislators gather at caucuses to discuss the public's business," Honzel wrote in his decision. "When they do so, the public has a right to observe their discussions and to be informed about what happens at those meetings."

The dirty little secret at the Capitol is that lawmakers from both parties, in both houses, have more-or-less ignored the court’s ruling…or at the spirit of the ruling. For the most part, the open caucus meetings that are announced on the House and Senate floors and held in meeting rooms during a recess in floor action are more show than substance.

The real party caucusing happens behind closed doors or at off-site locations.

Sometimes caucus leaders hold meetings at the Capitol with fewer than half the caucus members present. Without a quorum present, they can legally turn away the news media. This has happened to me in past sessions.

We in the Capitol press corps are also aware of off-site caucus meetings which place throughout the session. I’ve never been to one, but I’ve heard about them after the fact.

In past sessions I’ve seen large numbers of the House Democratic caucus walking to and from the Montana State Firemen’s Association office, which is located in house across the street from the Capitol on North Montana Ave.

I have also heard multiple tales of early-morning Senate Republican caucus meetings taking place at Jorgenson’s Restaurant and Lounge, on 11th Ave.

But as far as I know, it’s rare for an entire caucus to meet in secret, in the Capitol, during regular business hours.

At noon today I strolled onto the House floor and was surprised to see there wasn’t a single House Republican on the floor. Nor was anyone in the House leadership offices.

I  went down to the basement “bullpen,” an area in the west end of the Capitol basement where legislators hold meetings, eat lunch and otherwise relax during the session. The House Democrats lay claim to one portion of the bullpen, and the Republicans occupy the other room.

These areas are typically off-limits to the public and the press. A sign outside the door reads: “Legislators, staff and family only please!”

The door to the House GOP’s room is almost always open, so when I saw it was closed I became very curious. Without knocking I walked in and found myself in what was obviously  meeting of the full House GOP caucus, led by House Speaker Mark Blasdel.  A few members might have been absent, but I counted at least 52 GOP House members in the room. Clearly a quorum.

A House GOP staffer tried to turn me away at the door, but I showed him my press credentials and informed him that this was a party caucus meeting and thus open to the press. Montana GOP executive director Bowen Greenwood recognized me immediately and whispered something to House Majority Leader Gordon Vance, who then whispered to Blasdel, who looked in my direction and then carried on with the meeting.

My presence was immediately noted by just about everyone in the room. A few lawmakers shot me uncomfortable looks. A few appeared to be visibly peeved.

Blasdel told the caucus he expected a blast motion on Senate Bill 395, Missoula Democrat Sen. Dave Wanzenried’s Medicaid reform bill that was heard yesterday in the House Human Services Committee.

“The majority of leadership doesn’t support full expansion,” Blasdel told the caucus. “Just so you know, if that bill comes out, it is full expansion.”

Blasdel turned the floor over to Rep. Kelly Flynn, R-Townsend, who talked about the key points he planned to raise on the floor in opposition to blasting SB395.

Rep. Austin Knudsen, R-Culbertson, thanked the caucus for “sticking together” and voting “no” on a SB375, Buffalo Republican Sen. Jim Peterson’s anti-dark money campaign finance bill.

Rep. Duane Ankney, R-Colstrip, was one of 15 Republicans who joined Democrats in voting to bring the bill to the floor for debate.

“I liked the blast,” Ankney said. “Dark money is dark money.”

After the meeting, which lasted about 15 minutes, Blasdel told me House Republicans weren’t trying to hide anything by holding a caucus meeting without notice in a basement room that is off-limits to the public and the press.

“It was just trying to get people up to speed. It just drags on the floor,” Blasdel said. “There’s nothing hidden. No secret deals.”

House Minority Leader Chuck Hunter, D-Helena, admitted that Democrats, too, occasionally gather outside of the official announced caucus meetings. But Hunter denied the caucus violates the 1998 court ruling when they do get together.

“We routinely get together with members in the morning for an informal informational meeting,” Hunter said. “Members are not required to attend and we don’t have everybody there.”

Would I be turned away if I showed up?

“No. You’d likely be bored and show yourself the door,” Hunter said.

Hunter said one time this session a group of House Democrats met in numbers that did not constitute a quorum in order to discuss strategy. Hunter said when the caucus meets to take a caucus position on a bill that is done in public.

Either way, the notion that party caucus meetings are open to the press and public is pretty much a sham. Party leaders gain no advantage by disclosing their legislative strategy in the open. The real caucus whipping happens behind closed doors, often off site, and usually beyond the reach of the prying eyes and ears of the press and the public.

Tempers flare over “dark money” disclaimer bill

Republicans in the GOP Senate caucus clashed again on the Senate floor Friday over a bill aimed at requiring disclaimers on political speech paid for with anonymous or “dark money” funds.

House Bill 254, by Rep. Rob Cook, R-Conrad, would require the following disclaimer on political mailers and websites that are paid for with anonymous contributions:

"This communication is funded by anonymous sources.  The voter should determine the veracity of  its content."

Republican Senate Majority Leader Art Wittich, a staunch opponent of the bill, called it “terrible bill” and dubbed members of the Republican caucus who were likely to vote with Democrats to pass the measure “the crossover coalition.”

Wittich has opposed measures supported by some of his fellow Republicans aimed at cracking down at dark money anonymous political spending in Montana election.

Realizing that the bill was likely to pass, Wittich said:

“I didn’t make an amendment because I know where this vote is going. The crossover coalition and the Democrats are going to pass this bill, and everybody is going to be happy, and the headlines will be ‘we took a shot at dark money didn’t we do great,’” Wittich said.

Wittich said the content and “truthfulness”  of political messages is what is important.

“We’ve lost sight of all of that in all these campaign finance reform bills,” Wittich said. “We hear all about dark money, the spin of dark money. Well, it is about owning your vote. It’s about the exposure of your voting record and its the one thing people back home can find out about you.”

Wittich said voters can’t find out about “back room deals,” “vote trading,” “all the lobbyist transactions” and “spending other people’s money.”

Those last points touched a nerve with some of Wittich’s fellow Republicans, who took the unusual step of challenging their majority leader on the floor of the Senate.

Sen. Alan Olson, R-Roundup, is the sponsor of the two proposed legislative referendums on voting that last week sent the Senate into a tail spin as Democrats erupted on the floor in an attempt block their passage.

A week later Olson was at the center of another floor fight, but this time the jabs were traded within the GOP caucus.

Here’s the transcript of what happened after Wittich’s floor speech in opposition to HB254.

Sen. Alan Olson: Mr. Chairman, Sen. Wittich, could you identify the crossover coalition for me?

Chairman Ed Walker: To the bill please.

Sen. Art Wittich: Mr. Chairman, would you like a list, Sen. Olson?

Chairman: Sen. Olson.

Olson: Mr. Chairman, it was in the good senator’s discussion on the bill. I guess I’d like to know who the crossover coalition is, Mr. Chairman. Being as it was brought up by the good Senator from Bozeman.

Walker: I just feel that’s out of order at this point. Um, Sen. Wittich.

Wittich: Mr. Chairman, I don’t know the specific names right now, but we see it on the board, often.

Walker: Sen. Olson.

Olson: Mr. Chairman. Follow up?

Walker: Will Sen. Wittich yield?

Wittich: Yes.

Olson: Mr. Chairman, Sen. Wittich, you mention members of this body trading votes. Could you identify those individuals?

Wittich: Mr. Chairman, Sen. Olson, I’m not sure that would be a very comfortable thing for you if I started disclosing that. We all know that it happens.

Walker: Senators can we just keep the decorum in the body, please? Sen. Cliff Larsen, would like to close on your motion?

Larsen: Mr. Chairman, I think the floor is still open. I believe other people want to speak. I’d feel comfortable if they were recognized…

Walker: Sen. Peterson, for what purpose do you rise?

Sen. Jim Peterson: “Mr. Chairman I was going to rise on a point of personal privilege, but I’ll do that later.”

Walker: “Sen. Jones, for what purpose do you rise?

Sen. Llew Jones: “Mr. Chairman I do have a question for Sen. Wittich.

Walker: Will Sen. Wittich yield?

Wittich: Sure.

Jones: Mr Chairman, Sen. Wittich, you suggested that a crossover coalition was voting in some block. Are you suggesting that we should vote…should put something other than our conscience or our caucus ahead of our vote?

Walker: Sen. Wittich?

Wittich: Mr. Chairman, Sen. Jones, I’m not sure I understand the question.

Jones: You seem to be suggesting, somehow, that our vote was specifically owed to a group of people for some reason. That we couldn’t vote our conscience or we couldn’t represent our constituents, that somehow…

Walker: Can we keep it on the bill please..the bill… we’re talking about votes throughout this session. May we please keep it on the bill, which is HB254.

Jones: I withdraw my question.

Walker: Sen. Essmann.

President Jeff Essmann: Mr. Chairman, members of the body I think we should confine our discussion on the floor to the bill that’s before us and when we stray I would remind any member of this body they have the right to stand up and call the chair to bring any member that strays off the topic of the bill to order. That should be the procedure that we follow here if we stray.

Governor, parties, lawmakers react to remarkable chain of events in the MT Senate

Gov. Steve Bullock addresses the media, April 5, 2013

Here are the complete press releases and statements issued by lawmakers and political parties in the wake of Friday’s actions on the Senate as Democrats attempted to prevent the passage of two referendum proposals aimed at altering Montana elections. I’ve made edits, changes or alterations to emphases.

4:53 P.M., Senate Democrats issue statement

Democrats stand up for transparency in Montanans’ democracy

Helena, MONT. – The Republican leaders of the legislature today abused the legislative process to push through irresponsible attacks on Montanans’ constitutional right to vote. 

Led by Sen. Jeff Essmann, the Republican leaders made good their promise uncovered in secret emails released earlier this year: pass the buck through the referendum process so they don’t have to be held accountable on allegedly controversial issues, like same day voter registration. 

“Enough is enough,” said Senate Democratic leader Jon Sesso.  “Montanans deserve a democracy that works, but abusing the rules and shutting Montanans out of the ballot box is against everything our constituents value.” 

Republican leadership forced the legislative process on yet another referendum despite points of order called by Democrats, ignoring vociferous protests from the floor as well as Montanans in the gallery.

“Someone had to stand up for Montanans' right to vote,” said Sesso, “Republican legislators want to make it harder to vote, and they showed today they’re willing to use every legislative tactic to do that.”

SB 405 would put on the ballot an initiative to eliminate same-day voter registration. Republicans felt they would stand up for Montanans' right to participate in our democracy, and that includes allowing Montanans to register and vote on election day.

“We will hold them accountable. That's what Montanans want us to do, especially when they are trying to take away our cherished right to vote,” said Sesso.

###

Montana GOP response:

Democrat mob rule tactics fail to intimidate

Today at the Montana Legislature, chaos erupted when Democrats tried to bring the process of self-government to a grinding halt.

In danger of losing a crucial vote, Democrats in the Montana State Senate arranged for one of their Senators to disappear, so they could use a parliamentary tactic called "Call of the Senate." That tactic would have stopped all business of the Legislature until the "missing" Senator could be found.

If business had stopped, a number of good Republican bills would have failed to meet a crucial deadline, and would have died.

When the "missing Senator" was exposed as a ruse, and Republican Senate President Jeff Essmann went to proceed with business, Democrats shouted and pounded on their desks, trying to drown out any opposition to their views. They packed the Senate gallery with lobbyists and partisan operatives to shout and try to silence the majority of Senators who were doing the job they were sent their to do. Republican Senators refused to allow the mob rule tactics to intimidate them, and continued doing the people's business.

The Montana Republican Party released a statement on Democrat efforts to bring the legislature to a halt.

Bowen Greenwood, Executive Director of the Montana Republican Party, said, “Today Democrats in the Montana State Senate reached a new low. Trying to stop a crucial vote from happening, they shouted and pounded their desks and packed the gallery with partisan allies trying to drown out their opposition. Thank God mob rule did not prevail. Senate President Jeff Essmann did the right thing by refusing to be intimidated by anti-democratic, mob rule tactics.”

Senate GOP responds:

Statement by Senate Majority Leader Art Wittich Regarding Democrat Gamesmanship the Montana Senate

(Helena, MT) -- In response to today’s obstructionist actions by Democratic members of the Montana Senate, Senate Majority Leader Art Wittich  has released the following statement:
“The actions by the Democrat members of the Senate were unprecedented. They intentionally mislead Montanans and the Senate about a member’s absence to stage a piece of political theatre.
Today’s political gamesmanship was designed to try and deny Montanans the right to vote on two issues that would improve the integrity of our elections. Republicans worked diligently to conduct the people’s business.
Montanans expect their elected officials to work with one another. I expect all members of the Senate come together and honor our commitment to work for Montanans,” said Senate Majority Leader Art Wittich.
###

Gov. Steve Bullock addresses the media at 5:20 p.m.:

Readout of Governor Bullock’s Statement

Montana State Capitol – April 5, 2013

Today was a disappointing day for the State of Montana.

Since I was sworn in as your Governor, I’ve sought to change the tone in this building.  In my State of the State address, I asked the legislature to “act in a manner that we’re not ashamed to have our kids watching, because they are.” I won’t let my kids watch the news tonight.

I’m saddened by what we saw today – it’s worse than Washington, DC.  I’m not embarrassed by men and women demanding a right to speak – I’m disappointed by those who denied it.

Today, we saw elected Senators, people who have been entrusted by their neighbors to represent them, prevented from speaking – because they were trying to speak for those who are too often silenced. 

The Senate sought to eliminate the right to vote for senior citizens who may have moved into an assisted living facility.  Active duty military members who were overseas during voter registration.  Students, who simply moved down the hall of their dormitory.

Every week I meet with the House and Senate pages.  I tell them that there is no more important right, than the one to vote.  Because every vote matters.  I encourage them to stand up and be counted.  To stand up and make their voices heard.

The hyper-partisan nature of the Senate leadership is interfering with our good government.

When our ancestors passed the Corrupt Practices Act – a measure that sought to ensure some degree of confidence in our elected leaders – they weren’t acting as Democrats or Republicans.  They were acting as Montanans.

We live in a democracy – the greatest on earth.  A Democracy where a majority rules, but a minority has a voice and a right to be heard. 

The minority has rights – not only rights that were adopted by this legislature, but the right to be respected.  Respect is a Montana value - one that should be inherent in all of us who call this place our home.

I strongly encourage Sen. Essmann to reconsider every vote made today.  And I encourage the leaders in this body – not just those elected to leadership positions – to stand up and start acting in a way that would make our ancestors and our kids proud.

We have a lot of work to do tonight.  I’m sure I’ll see everyone tomorrow.

-30-

Montana Democratic Party spokesman Chris Saeger issues statement at 5:44 p.m.:

"The same extremist Republican leaders of the legislature who broke the rules to silence the minority today are the same ones who were exposed for plotting against moderates in secret emails." 

"Sen. Essmann won't stop silencing dissent until he gets all the way to the ballot box.  Republican party bosses in the legislature have made it clear that their own political gain is more important than Montanans' right to have their say in our democracy."

"We're proud that Montana Democrats stood up to make sure the everyone in our democracy plays by the same rules, and has the same right to access the ballot box."

That’s all for now. Be sure to check out the Great Falls Tribune for all the latest on this fascinating turn of events at the Montana Legislature.

Did the House Republican Majority Leader send a “kill list” to the Senate?

I’ve been trying to get to the bottom of a rumor swirling this week that House Majority Leader Gordon Vance, R-Bozeman, prepared a “kill list” that he sent over to Senate Majority Leader Art Wittich, R-Bozeman.

According to the rumor, after transmittal Vance prepared a list of bills which passed in the House that he wanted Republican committee chairs to kill in the Senate.

Sources who claimed to have seen the purported kill list said it was one-page long and was made of up Republican and Democrat bills, including some measures that passed the full House by wide bi-partisan margins.

In an interview Wednesday Vance denied the existence of such a list.

“What I did do was have conversations with fellow legislators,” Vance said Wednesday when asked about the list. “Did I have more than one conversation, probably over beers, with friends of mine in the other house, sure I did.”

Vance said there was “nothing formal” and that he acted as an individual member of the House, not as the Republican House Majority Leader.

But Vance’s initial explanation conflicted with what Wittich told me later that day.

In an interview Wednesday afternoon Wittich said he received a printed list from “House leadership” that asked Senate leaders to “take a close look” at certain bills. Wittich said there approximately 25 bills on the list that covered a wide-variety of issues. Wittich said he probably still had the list but was not able to produce it for me at the time.

Wittich said it’s not uncommon for leaders from one house to ask caucus members in the other house to “pay close attention” to certain measures.

“A lot of times you don’t understand the importance of a bill when it fist comes across your desk,” Wittich said.

Wittich said he passed the list on to Republican committee chairs.

Sen. Ed Buttrey, R-Great Falls, chairman of the Senate Local Government Committee, said he received a note from Wittich early last week asking him to “take no action” on a HB245, a bill by Rep. Champ Edmunds, R-Missoula, that authorizes counties to dedicate park land.

“I had never seen this before,” Buttrey said of the Wittich’s note. “My understanding was it came over from House leadership so I went over and asked House folks why they had trouble with the bill, but nobody seemed to know.”

Sen. Jon Sonju, chairman of the Senate Business, Labor and Economic Affairs Committee acknowledged that he also received a list but directed comments to Wittich.

“I can tell you that we are not holding on to any bills in my committee,” Sonju said.

Wittich said after he reviewed many of the bills on the list he wasn’t sure why the House leaders had concerns about those specific measures. Wittich said also said he didn’t know why Vance would deny preparing the list.

“There’s nothing wrong with saying ‘this is something that needs more careful review,’” Wittich said. “It’s hard to process hundreds of bills.”

When I followed up with Vance today he said his comments to me on Wednesday were a “specific answer to a specific question.” Vance said in general both caucuses create lists all the time.

“If you want to get general about it, we absolutely create all kinds of lists,” Vance said. “When thousands of bills are floating it’s hard to do it any other way.”

Vance said the existence of a “kill list” – as it was described to me by Republicans in the House and Senate who had knowledge of it – was “an unfounded rumor.”

“There are all kinds of things flying around, none of which are true,” Vance said.

Bills stacking up in the Senate

Bills that passed in the House and in Senate committees are stacking up on Republican Senate President Jeff Essmann’s desk.

In some cases the bills that passed the House aren’t being assigned to Senate committees. In other cases bills that passed Senate committees aren’t being scheduled for 2nd reading.

Of the 30 bills awaiting second reading in the Senate, a third passed in committee more than a week ago. All of those bills  passed unanimously or with bi-partisan support.

The word in the Capitol is that Democrats may raise the issue on the Senate floor today.

But it isn’t just Democrat bills getting hung up in the process.

As of the start of the week Essmann had held-off on assigning to committees more than 20 bills sponsored by House Republicans.

Many of those passed the Republican-controlled House by large margins – and about half were transmitted weeks ago – yet Essmann held-off on assigning them committees where they could be scheduled for hearings. The sponsors of many of those bills also happened to be Republicans who voted against HB315, Republican Rep. Austin Knudsen’s charter school bill that unexpectedly died on 3rd reading in the House last month.

Rep. Rob Cook, R-Conrad , is one of the Republican lawmakers who had bills on Essmann’s desk.

“It certainly appears from the feedback of the Senate leadership and a quick review of the bills that are presently pocket vetoed that the House vote on the charter school bill is the causal link,” Cook said.

The charter school bill was a priority for conservative Republicans in the House and Senate, and as Mike Dennison of Lee Newspapers recently pointed out, was backed by wealthy special interest groups including the Montana Family Foundation and Bozeman technology mogul Greg  Gianforte, former CEO of RightNow Technologies.

Gianforte is also a major Republican donor to Republican campaigns and causes.

Rep. Christy Clark, R-Choteau, was one of the Republicans who switched her vote on third reading to help kill HB315 on the House floor. Clark said Wednesday that she met with Essmann earlier this week to ask him why HB464, a measure that revises the state’s prevailing wage laws that passed the House 89-9, had not been referred to a committee.

“He said specifically that he wanted to express his disappointment in my vote on the charter school bill,” Clark said. “He was clear that he wanted to visit with me before he scheduled the bill.”

Republicans Roger Hagan, of Great Falls, and Steve Gibson, of East Helena – also “no” votes on the charter school bill – said they, too, met with Essmann individually to inquire about bills that weren’t being referred to committees.

Hagan and Gibson declined to comment on the specifics of their conversations with Essmann, but both men said Essmann expressed a desire to visit with them before scheduling their bills.

Essmann said Wednesday that he held the bills in order to encourage Republican sponsors who voted against the charter school bill to talk to him about their votes. Essmann said the practice of holding on to a bill in order to encourage a conversation “is something that has gone on forever.”

“I was curious what was going on with those votes on that charter school bill,” Essmann said. “It seemed curious.”

Essmann said he was concerned about the appearance of coordination between some House Republicans and Democrats and public education lobbyists who opposed the charter school bill. He pointed to a Jan. 27  letter Rep. Rob Cook, R-Conrad, wrote that was signed by six Republicans and six Democrats from the House and Senate and four public school lobbyists.

The letter was sent to the Districting and Apportionment Commission and urged the commission to assign a Senate district to Sen. Llew Jones, R-Conrad. The commission’s plan left Jones without a Senate district he could run in in 2014. Essmann said the redistricting commission made a change to their plan that “threatens Republican control of the Montana Legislature.”

Jones is the architect of the major school funding bill that passed the Senate with bipartisan support after a lengthy floor debate that pitted Democrats and moderate Republicans against conservatives in Republican leadership. Jones’ bill is now in the House where it is awaiting committee assignment.

Essmann said he didn’t know if there was coordination between the letter and the votes on the charter school bill.

“That’s why I wanted to have the conversations,” Essmann said.

Essmann said once House lawmakers spoke to him about the issue he assigned their bills to committee. He said not all of the people who voted against charter schools have come to talk to him.

“I don’t believe in retribution, I believe in conversation,” Essmann said.

Stay tuned for more. I’ll write later about the rumored “kill list” that a Republican leader in the House purportedly sent to the Senate.

Controversy surrounds plan to release free-roaming bison…in Germany

NPR has the story about a German prince who is on the verge of fulfilling a decades-old dream to release wisents – also known as European bison – into the wilds of Western Europe.

Prince Richard of Sayn-Wittgenstein-Berleburg, a 78-year-old logging magnate, plans to release a bull, five cows and two calves into a 30,000-acre forest he owns in North Rhine-Westphalia.

But the prince and the wisent’s supporters are running resistance that might sound familiar to many Montanans:

"We were skeptical because we weren't given enough information," says Helmut Dreisbach, a cattle farmer and vice chairman of the Farmers' Association of Siegen-Wittgenstein. "How will the animals react? Will they stay in a particular area or will they move onto working farmland?"

At the Montana Legislature lawmakers are grappling with similar concerns as wildlife groups, conservationists and Indian tribes seek to restore genetically-pure bison herds to the prairies American bison once called home.

Cattle ranchers are resisting the efforts and lawmakers are considering a host of bills aimed at restricting the translocation of bison. One bill even allows landowners to shoot bison that wander onto their property.

Sen. John Brenden, sponsor of the so-called “zero-tolerance” bison bill, doesn’t think there’s room on Montana’s landscape for the  native grazers:

 

 

“I don’t think we can have free-roaming bison in today’s modern society. That’s the bottom line,” Brenden said.

At one time tens of millions of bison roamed the Great Plains of North America. Today the American Prairie Reserve estimates there are fewer than 7,000 genetically pure, non-hybridized bison left. Returning free-roaming, genetically pure bison to the Great Plains is a dream of many, and the he group is working to create a 3 million-acre grassland reserve in northeastern Montana.

As Clayton B. Marlow, a professor of rangeland science and management at Montana State University, told NPR, reintroducing wild bison, whether in Montana or in Germany, presents a unique set of challenges:

"We can't release either population onto a landscape and rub our hands with satisfaction and walk away," he says.

Marlow said precautions have to be taken with the European bison to ensure they don't transmit diseases to local cattle or vice versa, a concern ranchers in Montana also have.

According to NPR, Prince Gustav is hoping for is a herd or two of 15 to 25 animals.

"If it doesn't work we will have to take them away, but it will work," he says. "If we leave them alone it will work."

Democrats will try to blast three bills aimed at protecting kids onto House floor

Democrats in the House will try to blast out of committee three bills aimed at protecting children.

The measures, by Rep. Ellie Boldman Hill, D-Missoula, and Rep. Pat Noonan, D-Ramsay, died in their respective committees.

House Bill 236, by Hill, would have eliminated a license exemption for religious private adolescent treatment programs.

HB 527, also by Hill, would have defined “cyber-bullying” in state law and created a misdemeanor offense.

Both bills were tabled in the House Judiciary Committee on party-line votes with majority Republicans voting against the measures.

HB98, by Noonan, would have appropriated funds to increase participation in the school breakfast program.

HB236 has caused the most stir and even caught the attention of CNN’s primetime cable news program AC360°, which on Friday aired a six-minute segment on the issues surrounding the bill and the Legislature’s handling of it.

The bill stemmed from allegations of abuse at Pinehaven Christian Children’s Ranch in St. Ignatius. AC360° last August aired allegations from former Pinehaven students who accused the pastor and school leaders of abuse, including choking.

The House Judiciary Committee tabled the bill on Feb. 23 and it was believed dead until last week, when Hill asked legislative staff about the bill’s status as a revenue bill.

According to Todd Everts, the Legislature’s chief lawyer, HB236 should have been classified as a revenue bill because it would require the boarding schools covered under the measure to pay a licensing fee, which would generate revenue for the state.

“We just missed it in the review process,” Everts said Monday.

The bill’s reclassification as a revenue bill is important because the deadline for transmitting revenue bills from one house to the other is not until April 5. The deadline for general bill transmittal was Feb. 28. Since HB236 is now classified as a revenue bill, Democrats have until April 5 to blast it on to the floor and pass it with a full floor vote.

Rep. Jenny Eck, D-Helena, is one of the advocates for HB236 on the judiciary committee. Eck said even if the Democrats fail in bringing the bill to the floor today they will try again.

Follow @TribLowdown on twitter for the latest updates on this afternoon’s debate on the blast motions.

Ghost-written dispatches to hometown papers

It came to a Tribune reporter’s attention this week that letters attributed to two different GOP lawmakers in weekly newspaper in our area bore striking resemblances to each other.

The first letters appeared in the Glasgow Courier and the Lewistown News-Argus. A quick Internet search of portions of the text from those two op-ed columns revealed at least seven other Republican House members posted nearly identical letters on their Facebook pages or submitted op-eds containing all or parts of the same letters.

The first two letters were attributed to House GOP Reps. Mike Lang, of Malta, and Ryan Osmundson, of Buffalo. Except for a few paragraphs the letters were identical.

Most of the letters start with the following text:

“As your representative in Montana’s legislature, I’ve spent the past month trying to take the views of my friends and neighbors to the state government in Helena. Here’s a report on how it’s going so far.

This week saw some exciting action on the House floor. We voted on a major package of job creation bills. We all know that Montana’s small neighborhood businesses are the people who create jobs. They hire our friends and neighbors and family members. So I voted for three bills that will make it easier for businesses to do that. They all focused on limiting litigation and workers compensation costs. When a small business spends less on liability insurance, it has more money on hand to put people to work.”

From there the letters deviate a bit. Some of the letters discussed wolf bills. Others expounded on corner crossing legislation. Some discussed school choice. Most of the letters contained a paragraph or two specific to the legislator, but aside from that they appear to all be written by the same person or persons.

Plug the first sentence of those two columns into a search engine and you’ll find other letters showing up in small town papers and on lawmakers’ Facebook pages.

Smaller weekly papers typically have limited Web presences, so it’s possible the letters are appearing in small papers throughout the state.

Max Hunsaker, a spokesman for the House GOP caucus, said it’s not uncommon for party staff to craft such letters for lawmakers.

“Obviously our staff prepares a letter draft that many members then customize for their own use,” Husaker said in an email. “It's not unusual for staff to play a role in preparing written messages for elected officials. I doubt that Gov. Bullock or Sen. Baucus personally write each piece published under their names.”

That’s true. Most statewide elected officials do have staff who write communications, speeches, emails, etc. on their behalf.

However, I can’t recall an example of Sen. Baucus and Sen. Jon Tester submitting the identical op-ed and claiming it as their own.

You can read some of the other letters we found:

Rep. Greg Hertz, R-Polson

Rep. Wylie Galt, R-Martinsdale

More examples:

http://leaderadvertiser.com/opinion/article_7e0896f0-659e-11e2-9751-001a4bcf887a.html

http://www.choteauacantha.com/news/article_2aa7ccd2-6518-11e2-9e0c-0019bb2963f4.html

http://www.fairfieldsuntimes.com/articles/2013/02/09/opinion/letters/doc5111586eca1e2777944538.txt

http://www.leaderadvertiser.com/opinion/article_a5c9a9f0-715f-11e2-97db-0019bb2963f4.html

https://www.facebook.com/WylieGaltForHD83/posts/326540524131230

Campaign finance watchdog: Texas fracking billionaires gave $51k to Montana GOP candidates in 2012

According to a report by the non-partisan campaign finance watchdog group National Institute for Money in State Politics, Texas fracking billionaire brothers Dan and Farris Wilks and their spouses gave  a collective total of $51,040 to more than 70 GOP legislative candidates in 2012. According to the report, in most instances they gave the maximum amount.

You can see the contributions from Dan, Staci, Dan and Staci, Farris, JoAnn, and Farris and JoAnn at FollowTheMoney.org.

“Sixty-four of the candidates they supported won; 63 are now legislators, and Tim Fox is the attorney general. Across both chambers, 70 percent of Republican legislators and 42 percent of the legislative body as a whole received contributions from the Wilkses during the 2012 election.”

You can read the full report here.

It’s worth a read.

The Follow The Money report draws attention to Dec. 13, 2012 Billings Gazette article detailing how the Wilks brothers are buying up huge tracts of land in eastern Montana:

“Near where the borders of Fergus, Musselshell and Golden Valley counties meet south of the Little Snowy Mountains, two billionaire Texas brothers have quietly collected more than 177,000 acres of ranch land in the last two years.”

According to Gazette reporter Brett French, the Wilks brothers own at least 276,000 acres in seven counties in eastern Montana.

According to Forbes, the Wilks brothers are worth an estimated $1.4 billion each. The Wilks brothers started out running a family masonry business in Texas and Oklahoma before venturing into hydraulic fracturing in and oil field serves in 2002.

According to Follow The Money some people are are concerned the Wilks brothers are amassing land to frack.

Regulation of fracking is largely left to the states; the EPA has limited authority to regulate the industry. Consequently, state lawmakers and officials determine the regulations and permitting requirements for drillers.

Reporter’s Notebook: Observations on Gov. Bullock’s first big speech

Wednesday night’s State of the State address was an interesting evening at the Capitol. It was the first time since I began covering Montana politics that a governor other than Brian Schweitzer was on the big stage, and I wasn’t sure what to expect.

The State of the State is a major event for a Montana governor. The address is broadcast live statewide on Montana PBS and Montana Public Radio, and just about every TV station, radio station and newspaper in the state covers the event.

Many of us in the Capitol press corps admitted prior to the speech we were unsure of how Bullock would do in his first-ever State of the State. After all, he’s following in the footsteps of one of the best orators many of us have ever seen in Montana. Former Gov. Brian Schweitzer wasn’t popular with everyone – particularly Republicans, whom Schweitzer needled at every turn – but at the end of the day nobody could argue the man’s ability to work a crowd.

Bullock brings a much different style to the governor’s office. As he pointed out in his speech, just three weeks in to his term as governor he’s “already been trying to change the tone in the halls of this building.”

While he didn’t mention Schweitzer by name, Bullock’s message on that point was clear: “I’m not Brian Schweitzer.”

The consensus among most people I talked to after the speech was that Bullock did a great job. It was a strong speech and it was masterfully delivered. Even many Republicans said they liked the speech, though they didn’t like all the spending proposals Bullock rolled out.

My first thought after he finished the address was this:

“This guy showed us tonight he is the governor.”

Observations from the floor

The press corps is mostly relegated to the east side of the House floor during speeches like this, which means we’re stationed along the GOP’s side of the aisle. That’s always an interesting place to be during a speech delivered by a Democrat. When the big applause lines come, we all watch to see which Republicans clap or stand and which Republicans keep their arms crossed tightly over their chests.

I paid keen attention to a standing ovation that came when Bullock blasted the rise of dark money groups that “target candidates and refuse to tell the voting public who they really are and what they really represent.”

“They hide behind made-up names and made-up newspapers. They operate out of P.O. Boxes or Washington, D.C. office buildings. They falsely proclaim themselves the guardians of Montana’s traditions.

These groups believe they can violate our laws and corrupt our government in order to create a system that benefits their special interests.

Montanans deserve better.”

At that point the House floor erupted with the cheers and applause from Democrats and a handful of enthusiastic Republicans.  Without having a clear view of the entire floor I can’t say for certain which Republicans stood  and cheered and which ones sat on their hands, but it was a moment many of us talked about after the speech. If anyone can produce video of that particular applause line that shows the entire House floor it would certainly been an interesting study.

Another point that stood out to me was when Bullock talked about returning from the airport after having greeted troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan to find out a Legislative committee had cut funding for “wrap-around” services that would make it easier for returning soldiers to attend universities.

“I urge you to restore these funds, live up to the promises we’ve made and welcome these warriors home with more than just words,” Bullock said.

At that point Democrats jumped to their feet and most of the Republican side of the aisle joined them. However, in front of me one Republican Senator remained firmly planted in her seat, not clapping. As another Senator looked over at her and said something she shook her head and said, “I’m not clapping for that.”

All-in-all Bullock did a good job of defining his policy agenda and laying down markers for the next three months of the Legislative session. He’s going to push for more spending on education. He wants a fix to the state pension system that “honors the commitment to Montana’s public servants.” He’s going to continue to push for his proposed $400 homeowner tax rebate. He wants to expand Medicaid. And he wants campaign finance reform that gets dark money out of politics.

How much of that agenda he will get accomplished remains to be seen as the Republican-dominated Legislature continues to chip away at spending proposals and bring their own policy agendas to bear on the state budget, namely, reducing Montana’s reliance on federal dollars.

Bullock, however, seemed sincere in his desire and willingness to work with GOP lawmakers going forward.

“We need each other if we’re going to make progress,” Bullock told members of the House and Senate.

The only words that rang truer were Bullock’s closing thoughts:

“At the end of any one of our terms. . . yours or mine. . . we will be measured by the progress we have made. And the true measure will be taken not by the politicians or pundits, but by our children. Let us not forget that it is to them we are most accountable.”

GOP Response to State of the State visualized

Culbertson Republican Rep. Austin Knudsen delivered the GOP’s response to Gov. Steve Bullock’s state of the state address.  Here’s the word cloud for that speech, based on the prepared remarks, for your viewing enjoyment.

Gov. Steve Bullock’s State of the State visualized

A word cloud is text data visualized. The above word cloud was generated from the written prepared text of Gov. Steve Bullock’s first State of the State address.

Bullock, who was elected in November, called on lawmakers to work with him to “invest in education,” “create better jobs” in order to “attract businesses” to invest in Montana.

I think word clouds are kinda nifty because they give readers an opportunity to visualize the main points, or themes, of large volumes of text. In this case, Gov. Bullock’s speech.

As you can see in short section cut-and-pasted from Bullock’s prepared speech, the word cloud does a good job highlighting Gov. Bullock’s stated priorities:

Members of the 63^rd Legislature, I ask you to join me.  What I ask of you tonight is simple and straightforward: 

First, be responsible with our budget, because I won’t allow you to spend more than we take in or make cuts that undermine our long-term stability.

Second, join me in focusing on creating jobs, investing in education, and making government more effective; and

Lastly, act in a manner that we’re not ashamed to have our children watching… because they are.

I am taking these principles to heart, and we’ve hit the ground running to create better jobs, better schools and a more effective government.

Mouse over the word cloud below to see larger versions of the words. Play around with it. What do you notice? What trends or themes pop out to you?

“Corporal Punishment” bill raises eyebrows

Rep. Jerry O’Neil, R-Columbia Falls, has a bill that would allow criminal defendants to bargain with a judge for corporal punishment in lieu of time behind bars.

You read that right.

Spanking instead of jail time.

I heard about this bill a couple weeks ago but hadn’t seen actual language until it started making the rounds on Facebook today.

According to the bill (which you can read here):

"…a person convicted of any offense by a court in this state, whether a misdemeanor or felony, may during a sentencing hearing as provided in 46-18-115 bargain with the court for the  imposition of corporal punishment in lieu of or to reduce the term of any sentence of incarceration available to the court for imposition.”

“The court and the person convicted of an offense shall negotiate the exact nature of the corporal punishment to be imposed, which must be commensurate with the severity, nature, and degree of the harm caused by the offender. If the court and the offender cannot agree on the exact nature of the corporal punishment to be imposed, the court shall impose a sentence as provided in 46-18-201.”

“The imposition of a sentence under this section must be carried out by the sheriff of the county in which the crime occurred if the sentence for corporal punishment reduced or eliminated the term of incarceration in the county jail or by the department of corrections if the sentence reduced or eliminated the term of incarceration in the state prison. Any imposition of sentence pursuant to this section must be carried out within a reasonable time.”

The measure is already raising eyebrows and is sure to catch the attention of those on the lookout for “bat crap crazy” legislation this session. Republican leadership has been doing its best to tamp down any potential bills the other side might use to embarrass the GOP as they work to craft a budget. This one apparently didn’t get tamped.

As one Facebook commenter quipped: “Is Jerry O'Neill pandering to the masochist criminal lobby? I didn't even know that lobby existed.”

The bill was marked “ready for delivery” today but hasn’t yet been assigned to a committee. I’lll be sure to keep you posted.

House, Senate leaders name special joint committee to address pension shortfall

Sen.President Jeff Essmann, R-Billings, and House Speaker Mark Blasdel, R-Somers, named eight Republicans and four Democrats to a joint-select committee on pensions. Sen. Dave Lewis, R-Helena, will chair the committee.

According to the leaders, the bi-partisan committee will be tasked with developing ideas and solutions to address Montana’s state pension shortfall.

“Our state pension shortfall is a real problem, that’s why it is critical for us to come together to find a solution,” Essmann said. “We need a solution that will allow us to keep the promises we have made to our public employees, provide fairness to future employees, and be responsible and fair to Montana taxpayers.

Blasdel said addressing the shortfall in Montana's state pension fund is one of the Legislature’s biggest jobs this session.

“Working on the problem through a joint bipartisan subcommittee is a good way of making sure we're focusing on work, not on politics,” Blasdel said.

Sen. Minority Leader Jon Sesso, D-Butte, called the committee “a good step forward,” but he lamented the fact that more Democrats weren’t on the committee.

“We would have preferred a couple more seats at the table, to reflect the true makeup of the 63rd Legislature,” Sesso said. “Regardless, the Democrats appointed to have a good working knowledge of the issue are prepared to make significant contributions to craft a fair, workable solution to the problem.”

The Joint-Select Committee will meet Tuesdays and Thursdays. According to lawmakers the committee will engage stakeholders and members of the public in an effort to thoroughly understand the challenges facing Montana’s public employees pension funds.

Members of the Joint-Select Committee on Pensions include:

Sen. Dave Lewis (R) - Chairman
Sen. Chas Vincent (R)
Sen. Ron Arthun (R)
Sen. Scott Sales (R)
Sen. Larry Jent (D)
Sen. Tom Facey (D)
Rep. Rob Cook (R)
Rep. Carl Glimm (R)
Rep. Bill McChesney (D)
Rep. Joanne Blyton (R)
Rep. Keith Regier (R)
Rep. Kathy Swanson (D)

VIDEO: Baucus defends tax breaks in ‘cliff’ deal

Sen. Max Baucus brushed off recent criticism over billions of dollars in corporate tax breaks contained in the so-called “fiscal cliff” deal passed by Congress last week.

Speaking to members of the press following his address to the 2013 Montana Legislature, Baucus said the package of tax cuts -- which was approved last August by the bipartisan Senate Finance Committee included in the fiscal cliff deal – also eliminated “tens of billions of dollars” of tax credit “extenders,” which are legislative extensions of soon-to-expire laws.

“Frankly I was pretty proud of myself,” Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said Thursday. “Congress was basically totally dysfunctional on this general subject, so I got the committee together and I said ‘OK, everybody here, Republicans and Democrats, lets work together…we have to get rid of some of these. It’s deadwood. It’s wasteful.’”

(Full video at the bottom of this post).

The package of extenders inserted by the White House into the fiscal cliff bill contained 52 tax break extensions for corporations totaling $64 billion. Some of the tax breaks went to specific companies such GE, Burlington Northern Santa Fe, JPMorgan Chase, and NASCAR. Another tax break benefits rum producers in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

“Now to be honest there were a couple in there I was not happy with,” Baucus said. “One that’s come out in the press quite frankly I’m not very happy with and I don’t know how it got in there. And I made that view known to my office.”

Baucus said the committee passed the measure on a bi-partisan 19-5 vote.  Baucus said the  measure eliminated 20 tax breaks that were scheduled for extensions for a savings of about $30 billion to taxpayers. A spokeswoman for Baucus said the overall measure contained many provisions which saved Montanans money.

“Max’s number one focus was making sure taxes didn’t go up for Montana families and small businesses because of tax cuts that were set to expire, and he worked with both Republicans and Democrats to put together a bill that could get enough support from both parties to make sure that didn’t happen,” Baucus spokeswoman Jennifer Donohue said in a statement Thursday.

Baucus has come under fire in some quarters after Washington Examiner columnist Timothy Carney pointed out that many of the corporations that benefited from the tax breaks employ lobbyists with close ties to Baucus to lobby.

“Pick any one of the special-interest tax breaks extended by the cliff deal, and you're likely to find a former Baucus aide who lobbied for it on behalf of a large corporation or industry organization,” Carney wrote in his Sunday column.

Carney pointed out that former Baucus chief of staff Peter Prowitt is the in-house lobbyists and an executive for GE and was on the lobbying team that won some of the tax credits.
Carney:

“Two weeks before the Finance Committee hearing during which the bill was hashed out, GE's political action committee topped off its contributions to Baucus' Glacier PAC with a $2,000 check, according to the PAC's federal filings. This brought GE's contributions to Baucus' PAC to the legal maximum of $10,000 for the election cycle.”

Baucus’ former political advisor, Shannon Finley, lobbied on behalf of the American Wind Energy Association, “which lead the effort to extend a wind tax credit,” Carney wrote. Finley also represented Beam Inc., on the rum tax break.

According to Carney, former Baucus tax policy advisor Patrick Heck lobbied on behalf of Burlington Northern Santa Fe, which received a railroad maintenance tax credit, and Michael Evans, Baucus’ former legislative director, lobbied for clients who benefitted from a biofuels tax credit.

Asked Thursday about the connection between his former staffers and recipients of the extended tax breaks, Baucus said: “the main thing is to just keep our eye on the ball.”

“This is legislation which permanently prevented income tax increases on virtually all Montanans,” Baucus said. “This is legislation that permanently raised exemptions for the estate tax so that Montana farmers ranchers and family-owned companies like auto dealerships can be guaranteed there will be no increase in federal estate taxes that jeopardize their operations.”

Baucus said he goal is to get rid of as many extenders as possible in the coming year.

“I’m hopeful that during tax reform this next year we’ll be able to get rid of even more,” Baucus said.

Some of the extenders Baucus supported include:

· Deductions for college tuition and fees. According to Baucus’ office, about 2 million Americans and nearly 6,000 Montanans used that deduction in 2010 (the most recent IRS data).

· Deductions for teachers who buy classroom supplies out of their own pockets. According to Baucus’ office, 3.7 million teachers nationwide and nearly 11,000 Montana teachers relied on the deduction in 2010 (the most recent IRS data).

· Tax credits for businesses that hire new workers. And specific tax credits for businesses that hire unemployed veterans and tax credits for employers who make up the salary difference for Guard and Reserve members who are called to deploy.

· Expensing provisions that allow small businesses to write off the full costs capital investments in the first year instead of breaking over a longer period of time – up to 39.5 years.

· The research and development tax credit, which Baucus’ office said “allows businesses to invest in innovation and stay competitive.”

· A production tax credit that supports wind farm projects including the Rim Rock Wind farm in Glacier and Toole Counties and the Shawmut Wind Farm. “Nearly 1,500 Montana jobs have been supported by the Production Tax Credit,” according to Baucus’ office.

· Charitable deduction for farmers and ranchers who allow easements on their land for conservation purposes.

Here’s the full video from Baucus’ interview with Montana press at the Capitol:

The Lowdown : News and notes from the Montana capital. http://www.mtlowdown.com http://www.greatfallstribune.com

Montana Legislature Week 1 schedule

The 2013 Montana legislative session is upon us.

The excitement kicks off today at 10 a.m. when the statewide office holders are sworn-in on the steps of the Capitol.

Rumor has it that at 11 a.m. a group of Montana Indians are expected to arrive at the Capitol for a “flash mob” round dance to draw attention Indian issues as part of the growing “Idle No More Movement.” You can read more about Idle No More in today’s Tribune.

At noon the 2013 Legislature officially convenes and lawmakers will be sworn-in.

The rest of the weekly schedule, subject to change, is as follows:

Tuesday, Jan 8, 8 a.m. – Law School for Legislators – House Chambers

Tuesday, Jan. 8, 2 p.m. – Chair of the day training for House members – House Chambers

Wednesday, Jan. 9, 8 a.m. – Organizational Committee Meetings: House State Administration – Rm 455; House Taxation – Rm 152

Wednesday, Jan. 9, 9 a.m. – Budget presentation by Legislative Fiscal Division staff to Joint House Appropriations and Senate Finance & Claims Committees – House Chambers

Wednesday, Jan. 9, 9:30 a.m. - Organizational Committee Meeting: Joint House FRET & Senate Energy - Rm 317 - re: proposed federal changes to how Power Marketing Administrations operate

Wednesday, Jan. 9, upon adjournment of floor sessions – Rules training for all legislators – Rm 172

Thursday, Jan. 10, 1 p.m. – Senate Max Baucus will address joint legislative session upon convening of floor sessions in joint session – House Chambers

Thursday, Jan. 10, 3 p.m. - Organizational Committee Meetings: House Fish, Wildlife & Parks – Rm 152; House Local Government – Rm 172; Senate Energy – Rm 317

Friday, Jan. 11, 8 a.m. – Organizational Committee Meetings: Appropriation/Finance & Claims Subcommittees: Education – Rm 472; General Government – Rm 350; Health & Human Services – Rm 102; Judicial Branch, Law Enforcement & Justice – Rm 317A; Long-Range Planning – Rm 317B; Natural Resources & Transportation – Rm 317C

Friday, Jan. 11, 1 p.m. – Presentation of proposed legislative districting & apportionment plan presented by Justice Regnier to joint legislative session upon convening of floor sessions in joint session – House Chambers

Friday, Jan. 11, 3 p.m. – Organizational Committee Meetings: Joint House & Senate Education Committee – Common Core Informational Hearing – Rm 303; House Federal Relations, Energy & Transportation – Rm 172; House Human Services – Rm 152; Senate Natural Resources, Rm 317

Saturday, Jan. 12, upon adjournment of floor sessions - Tour of Montana State Prison & Montana Correctional Enterprises – open to all legislators - bus scheduled to leave 15 minutes after adjournment of last floor session -