Thursday, January 31, 2013

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

faldc5-68llabfj5es1j1gr7ii9_originalWednesday 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. faldc5-68llcnso06vsa5vzii9_original

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.”

Wednesday, January 30, 2013

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

Bullock Word CloudA 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 63rd 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?

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

“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.

Thursday, January 17, 2013

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)

Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Watchdog groups call on IRS to investigate ATP

Two campaign finance watchdog groups are calling on the IRS to investigate American Tradition Partnership, the “dark money” group at the center of a ProPublica/Frontline investigation last fall.

According to the letter from the watchdog groups:

“…the apparently false information included misrepresentations made to the IRS by WRP in urging expedited approval of its application and misrepresentations in its application to the IRS, asserting that it would not participate or intervene in elections.”

According to Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer:

“This is yet another case where a group apparently has claimed status as a section 501(c)(4) “social welfare” organization in order to keep secret from the American people the donors financing its campaign activities. According to news reports published by ProPublica and Frontline, American Tradition Partnership (ATP) appears to have knowingly misled the IRS about its campaign activities and knowingly submitted false information to the IRS to obtain its tax-exempt status on an expedited basis.”

The groups are calling on the IRS to investigate and “take appropriate action against ATP.”

According to the letter submitted to the IRS Tuesday, WTP submitted its Form 1024, Application for Recognition of Exemption under Section 501(a), to the IRS on July 21, 2008.

A report by ProPublica and Frontline found that WTP submitted a letter to the IRS on September 29, 2008, while their IRS application was still pending, requesting that the IRS expedite processing of its application. According to the report, the request for expedition stated that Jacob Jabs, who was described as the organization’s “primary donor,” had promised to make a $300,000 donation to the group but only if WTP received recognition from the IRS for tax-exempt status by September 29, 2008. Id.

The letter from the watchdog groups continued:

The letter further said, however, that Jabs had extended his deadline, and said he “will give us the grant if we receive our tax exempt status by October 15, 2008.  If we have not received our tax exempt status by this date, Mr. Jabs has assured us that he will no longer contribute said amount and instead will direct his donation to other organizations.”

According to the ProPublica/Frontline report, the IRS responded to WTP the next day, Sept. 30, 2008, and said that the request for expedited consideration would be granted.  Tax-exempt status as a section 501(c)(4) “social welfare” organization was granted to WTP two days later on Oct. 2, 2008.

A subsequent  ProPublica and Frontline report on Oct. 30 2012, said Jabs later said “he had never pledged money to the group, and never even been in contract with them until press stories appeared naming him.” 

The ProPublica/Frontline story states:

“I think they just grabbed my name out of a hat to forward their agenda,” Jabs told us.  “I know nothing about the group, never heard of them, never have heard of them until the last few days, and I did not, absolutely did not, commit $300,000 to start this company.” (Jabs also spoke with the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, again denying any connection to the group.)

A subsequent release of WTP’s bank records as a result of state court litigation in Montana “show[ed] no money came in from the man WTP claimed as its primary donor when it asked the IRS to expedite the approval of its application,” ProPublica/Frontline reported.

According to the letter:

Assuming the ProPublica/Frontline reports are correct, the IRS agreed to expedited processing of WTP’s application for tax-exempt status that resulted in its approval, based on apparent material fraudulent information that WTP provided to the IRS and that WTP had to know was false.

On these grounds alone, the section 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status of WTP should be revoked and the IRS should consider what, if any, other actions it should take against WTP.  The IRS should also forward any relevant information in this case to the Department of Justice so the Department can determine what, if any, action it should take against WTP for apparently submitting material false information to a federal agency in order to obtain action by the agency.

You can read the entire press release and the letter here.