2008 Election: Education

If the election were held today . . .

You’re correct - - - the election is still two weeks away.

But, when the dust settles and the votes are counted, legislative power is divvied up in Helena.

The party with the majority of the seats controls the legislative process and the agenda.

And, good or bad, power is usually follows seniority.

Take the names of the following members and plug them into the various leadership positions and key committee chairmanships [Appropriations; Taxation; Judiciary; Natural Resources].


In the Senate, if the R’s win 26 seats, here are the projected prime-time players on the GOP team:

Bob Story; Greg Barkus; Dan McGee; Jim Peterson; Keith Bales; Joe Balyeat; Gary Perry; Roy Brown (although I need to caution the reader that Roy might not be a member if he takes out Schweitzer); Roy Brown (OK. He’s back).

Scouting report: All are middle-aged or older males; most are angry about something. Believe in no regulation, free market solutions and tax cuts for the landed aristocracy and out of state corporations.

No women. No one under the age of fifty.

Word has it that the leadership will give neither Dave Lewis nor Rick Laibel much rein - - - too moderate. Informally, John Brueggeman has holds the Sam Kitzenberg rubber chicken memorial award for his comments about the GOP’s voter suppression caper.

Pretty grim.



The Senate D team with at least 26 seats:

Carol Williams; Mike Cooney; Jesse Laslovich; Kim Gillan, Trudi Schmidt; Bob Hawks; Lynda Moss; David Wanzenried.

Scouting report: Four women. The youngest member of the caucus [28] in the mix.


The House line-ups with at least 51 seats.

GOP: Scott Sales; Dennis Himmelberger; Scott Mendenhall; Janna Taylor, Tom McGillvray; Dave Kasten; Bob Lake; Ron Stoker; Ed Butcher;.

Scouting report: Unlike the Senate, this team has a woman. Like the Senate, talk about angry white men!

Free marketers.


Dems: Margie Campbell; Bob Bergren; Dave McAlpin; Dan Villa; Mike Jopek; Jon Sesso; Jill Cohenour; George Groesbeck; Franke Wilmer.

Scouting update: Loads of women, including an American Indian. And, the youngest current member in the Legislature [25] in the mix.


In the event of a tie . . . well, let’s not go there.

OK, so, when it comes to funding for public education, who do you want to chair the Appropriations Committee? Or, which team includes members who actually believe in public education in the first place?

And, when it comes to funding for the University System, which team would most likely provide the level of funding needed to avoid large tuition increases?

Speaking of funding for the U-System, for the record, GOP team members Senator Joe Balyeat and House Speaker Scott Sales penned the arguments in opposition to the statewide 6-mill levy [LR 118], which has been authorized and re-authorized every ten years by the voters since 1948. One of their arguments is that by defeating the re-authorization of the mill levy, the voters will be sending the University System a message that it disagrees with the policy against students having firearms on campus.

http://sos.mt.gov/ELB/archives/2008/voters/2008_Voter_Information_Pamphlet.pdf. See page 10.

So, in other words, by denying the system $13.4 million a year, the plan evidently is to force the Board of Regents to change the policy and allow every student to pack heat.

Good idea?

[These and other equally bad arguments against the levy find a voice with the following groups: Treasure State Network, Montana Family Coalition, Republican Roughriders, American Dream Montana, Montana Values Coalition, Help Our Moral Environment, Montanans for Tax Reform, Montanans for Property Rights, Constitution Party of Montana, Montanans In Action, Republican Assemblies of Montana and the Montana Shooting Sports Association.

Guess which line-ups they prefer and are working hard to put into power?]

While this was all being sorted out, tuition would have to be increased to offset the $13.4 million loss.

Oh, and the next election to re-authorize the mill levy isn’t until 2018.

Of course, the University System could ask the 2009 Legislature [and each session thereafter] to backfill the lost proprty tax revenue. But, which team members in the Senate and House would you bet would be more sympathetic to the plight of students? And, in this case, which team members would scream the loudest that, if the Legislature acted to restore the funding from state sources, it would be violating the “will of the voters”?

The only good news in the midst of this lunacy would be that, as tuition goes up, perhaps gun-toting students would only be able to afford enough ammunition to load one clip.

You get the idea. The legislative process is about reconciling competing priorities and conflicting vlaues.