While the ongoing farce of John Boehner’s default meltdown in Washington has led every single political leader in the nation other than Denny Rehberg to take a position, back home, today’s news provided a stark illustration about the difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to budgeting.

The Democrats believe in using facts and honest revenue calculations; the latter believe in using distortions and being deliberately obtuse to deny workers small raises, the needy social services, and children better schools.

Let’s look back at the session, shall we?

Republican House Speaker Mike Milburn, in February:

What he is doing is making our job difficult, because we have a responsibility to do. We still are short and we are short a lot of money and it is not looking that good into the future….We are doing better, but we are doing it at a less rate of growth than we have seen in the past. We have to deal with that, those are real numbers we have to deal with that, we can’t play games, we can’t play politics.”

Republican Budget Guru Dave Lewis in January:

Sen. Dave Lewis, R-Helena and chairman of the Senate Finance and Claims Committee, said Democrats, including Gov. Schweitzer, are being too optimistic. He said most Republicans believe the economy isn’t ready to take off, and that state spending must be reduced to match what they believe may be depressed tax revenue for some time.
“I could be a little less hard on that issue if I thought the economy was improving, but I just don’t see it,” Lewis said. “I think that’s the big policy debate of the session.”

Throughout the session Democratic leaders like Carol Williams, Jon Sesso, and Governor Schweitzer made it clear that a fact-based examination of tax revenue made draconian cuts and broken promises entirely unnecessary.

And they were right. How does the state look today? $340 million in the bank:

Schweitzer says Montana will start this new fiscal year with about $340 million dollars in the bank.This is the largest amount of money the state has ever had set aside for emergencies.

It’s bad enough that Montana Republicans acted the way they did during the session. It’s even worse that they couldn’t be bothered to be intellectually honest while they did it.

In light of today’s protest at the Capitol brought to you by Earth First! and Northern Rockies Rising Tide (and it’s surely critically important to distinguish those diverse groups) and some blowback from some snarky tweets I posted this afternoon, I thought I’d comment about just how ineffective—and even damaging—today’s protest was.

Initially, I should offer a surprising concession for a blogger—I really don’t know enough about the Keystone XL pipeline yet to take a strong position. I suspect, however, that I sympathize with the position of the protesters. I’ve long argued that Montana needs to be much more cognizant of the environmental impact of our pursuit of resource extraction. We’ve often given far too much latitude and trust to oil companies. both of which they have far too often abused.

That being said, today’s protest was nothing more than a destructive, self-righteous stunt that did far more damage to the effort to protect our environment than benefit.

Let me be clear: I deeply admire those willing to make the sacrifices necessary for protest. I’ve got no more significant heroes than Thoreau and King. But protest comes with a profound responsibility—a reasonable chance to effect positive change through your actions. It can’t be protest for the sake of protest or attention; it has to increase the odds of improving the situation.

Actions like today’s media-driven spectacle are so damaging to the cause of protecting the environment. The average Montanan waking up to her newspaper tomorrow or watching the TV news this evening will not only not be persuaded to resist further resource extraction in Montana, but will likely be so turned off by antics like shredding paper on the Capitol floor, dancing on the governor’s table, and screaming rather than listening, that they will move in the opposite direction.

Let me preempt an argument I anticipate. Today’s protest was not King in Birmingham, it was not unions in Wisconsin. I’m not condemning all protest, which is essential for direct democratic action.

Environmentalism—when stripped of the negative stereotypes so effectively leveraged in the past few decades by corporate interests and unfortunately on display today—is the majority position. Montanans want clean air, clean water, and clean land. The ongoing devastation of the Yellowstone River presents, in a horrible context, new opportunities to broaden coalitions to protect our environment with new allies.

There is a great deal of momentum to protect Montana’s most important heritage, but we won’t get there by reinforcing the idea that environmentalism is dominated by those who are unreasonable and irrational. Today’s protest/performance art only reinforces those ideas, and damagingly so.

I haven’t actually retired from writing on this site, but the combination of exhaustion stemming from AP test preparation and the lingering sour smell in Helena from the Legislature seemed to warrant a little break. A couple of stories in the news the past few days presented the opportunity to jump back into the fray.

The Worst Governor and Speaker of the House in Montana History Don’t Like Governor Schweitzer!

“I don’t even want my name in the same sentence with this guy,” said Martz. “The guy is so untruthful.”

House Speaker Mike Milburn, who though he had a budget deal with the governor, said the “pompous display” is too much.

“The feedback I received from people on the streets, in church, and elsewhere, from Democrats and Republicans, is that the governor’s theater and chasing the spotlight has lost its luster,” Milburn said.

It’s hard to know where to start in these quotes from a piece by Matt Gouras. Judy Martz, who covered up a homicide and who allowed her office to be used for fundraising as part of “regular daily business” is attacking Governor Schweitzer for his lack of honesty. I can understand Martz’s bitterness; if I were her, I certainly wouldn’t want people to compare me to a successful, popular governor, either. As much as Montanans enjoyed getting a preview of Bush-level incompetence and unpopularity before 2000, former Governor Martz should probably stick to talking about speed skating and garbage, the only two things she seems to know about.

If Mr. Milburn honestly left this session feeling like the Montana public was more upset at Governor Schweitzer than the Legislature, he needs to get out more and read some newspapers.

As for me, Schweitzer for Senate in 2014 sounds pretty good.

Dennis Rehberg Doesn’t Know How He’d Vote On Another Critical Issue!

There’s a bigger story about today’s false equivalency between Rehberg’s support of Big Oil and Tester’s support for small, rural banks and credit unions, but I have to say that the most telling part was that, once again, Representative Rehberg has no idea how he would vote on major legislation affecting thousands of Montanans. When asked for his position on delaying implementation of the swipe fee limit, Rehberg boldly led:

U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont., who’s challenging Tester for Senate in 2012, says he hasn’t taken a position on the issue.

If I had dollar for every time Rehberg didn’t know how he would vote or what his position was on a critical issue, I could probably buy myself a huge subdivided former ranch.

I can only hope that one day the Montana media will hold Representative Rehberg accountable for what is quite clearly craven politics or pure ignorance. Odds are that won’t ever happen.

The Republican PSC Continues to Demonstrate Its Focus on Critical Issues

In a truly delightful third person piece, Former Chair Bill Gallagher and PSC member Brad Molnar offered a restrained, rational critique of Travis Kavulla, the current chair in the Laurel Outlook:

In a five-member commission, any three members can change the leadership at any time. There is no need to create offenses and pronounce guilt to acquire a title. The demagoguery, creation of falsehoods and character assassination used to accomplish this event were unnecessary, grossly unfair, and makes the acquired titles meaningless and without trust.

Why should you care? In general, because it will cost you money and harms our fragile economy. Investors and lenders shy away from controversy and uncertainty.

A 27-year-old staging two political coups in four months and enfranchising Democrat minority views that were soundly defeated by Republican voters in the last election, matches the definitions of controversy. That drives up interests rates and those appear in your utility bill. Those unnecessary costs are bad for families – bad for employers – bad for Montana.

Montanans are weary of back-stabbing and innuendo used to promote political ideals or candidates, let alone advance personal, political and power agendas. When does it end? Only when the press holds responsible those who think our government is their earned playground and we are but their personal stepping-stones and ATM machines.

I wonder if Montanans might not want to re-think their PSC votes now.

A reliable source has informed me that HB 456 will likely be one of the many deserving bills to get the veto from Governor Schweitzer tomorrow. As I have awkwardly noted and others have eloquently commented, this bill is nothing more than a tremendous overreaction by a few people who simply aren’t interested in ensuring that Montana students get the health information they need. It’s a terrible bill—in its ideology, language, and implementation.

Let’s hope the governor has heard the wisdom of students on this issue:

Planned Parenthood’s Teen Council  has already made a positive difference in the Helena community. We have had the opportunity to present to local church youth groups about HIV/AIDS information; this is a perfect example of the trust our peers have placed in us. Most of the students were shockingly unaware of the realities of HIV/AIDS, how to contract it, and ways to prevent it. We want to continue to go into local classrooms and youth groups to help our peers understand all aspects of health education. Please do not take away this opportunity to continue  our work with local youth. Look past the misinformation surrounding the issues and help us to help our peers.

Misinformation on critical health issues related to human sexuality can cost young people their health, their lives, and their futures. Here’s to hoping the governor lets this bill die the death it deserves.

Governor Schweitzer bullies the poor Republicans in the Legislature:

He is also asking that the 93 legislators who voted for SB 106 give up about half a year’s worth of their state funded health insurance – about $409,000 – to cover the state’s cost of joining the suit.

In his letter to the Senate,  he wrote, “I find it particularly ironic that some legislators are willing to spend Montana taxpayers’ money to challenge the federal health care reform act for symbolic reasons, while at the same time deriving personal advantage from state health care laws and policies that allow them, as legislators, to receive taxpayer-funded health insurance benefits.”

Seems fair to me.

I know that Republicans in Montana hate Governor Schweitzer because he has crushed them at the polls, remained popular despite their whining, and induced incoherent, public profanity-laced tirades from their Legislative leadership, but I think it probably goes a touch too far when, in your attack, you cite the John Birch Society as evidence.

That’s just what Aaron Flint did today in his entirely incoherent attack on the Governor, one that suggested Schweitzer could rule as a dictator in Libya.

The amazing thing? The claim from the Birchers wasn’t the worst part of the argument. It does, however, show just how low the Republican attack machine will sink to discredit Democrats.

The front page story in today’s Lee papers has the commenters and legislators buzzing because it seems to suggest that there has been some sort of massive expansion of state government under Brian Schweitzer. A quick look at math makes it pretty clear that the story just isn’t that important.

• How many people lived in Montana in 2004? 926,865
• How many live here today? 988,415.

For those of you who don’t believe in math or science, that’s a growth rate of 6.64%. The massive growth rate of state government highlighted in the article? A whopping 8.8%. A 2.2% difference is easily explained by factors that the article does mention: expanded programs like CHIP, the Office of Public Defender, and the “growth industry” of Corrections.

Perhaps the rate of growth in state government is something to look at it, but it’s hardly the crisis this sensationalistic story suggests. If the Legislature wants to advocate focused, appropriate cuts based on research of needs, that’s one thing. To overreact and make massive cuts would simply ignore demographic reality.

Update: It’s also worth noting that Montana has fewer public sector employees per capita than North Dakota, Idaho, and those known socialists in Wyoming, according to the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Via Matt Singer, some good news for Senator Tester from Public Policy Polling headed into his re-election campaign: despite the strong Republican trend in Montana, he’s still seen quite favorably by Montana voters:

Tester posts a 50-40 job performance mark, putting him in the top ten among the senators PPP has measured this year. That is particularly impressive, considering that Republicans outnumber Democrats by nine points in this sample, and even independents are more prevalent.

In a hypothetical matchup with Denny Rehberg, Tester is close, at 46-48, and he has a lead over Steve Daines at 48-37.

Daines supporters will probably try to spin this as positive news, but I find it hard to believe that Montana voters will come to like Daines more as they learn more about him, no matter how many campaign laws he breaks in the process of becoming acquainted with them.

Senator Tester’s going to face a tough challenge in 2012 and he’s occasionally disappointed some of us on the left, but it’s encouraging that he seems largely to have escaped the displeasure directed at Senator Baucus by maintaining pretty close adherence to the values that got him elected in the first place.

As a side note, the continuing popularity of Marc Racicot has to be encouraging for Governor Schweitzer’s future aspirations, given that Schweitzer has actually been an effective leader of the state.

While Republicans cry about Governor Schweitzer bullying them, I think more Democrats need to learn the value of calling them out on their nonsense and lies.

Senator Dave Lewis, last week:

Lewis said he is considering capping state employees’ salaries at twice the average Montana family’s income, which he estimated is about $40,000 per family. So he would cap employees’ pay at $80,000
“When I retired 10 years ago, I never made over $55,000,” Lewis said. “Management salaries have doubled over 10 years. I think that’s way more than taxpayers can afford.”

Governor Schweitzer, yesterday:

When a reporter Monday asked Schweitzer about the proposal, the Democratic governor had ready a PowerPoint slide that showed Lewis’ “actual salaries” of $70,000 and $75,000 in 1992 and 1999, and that the latter salary adjusted for inflation would be nearly $109,000 in 2010.

Maybe Senator Lewis should stick to plans to urge withdrawal from the UN.

The Great Falls Tribune is reporting that the federal government will pay the entirety of costs from the severe flooding on the Rocky Boy reservation this summer. Excellent news for Montanans who definitely need the federal assistance and telling about the difference between Montana’s sole representative and Democratic leaders.

What did the Democrats do? They persuaded the federal government to give additional assistance:

Requests to amend the declaration to include full funding came in from a wide swath of Montana’s elected officials, including Gov. Brian Schweitzer, Sens. Max Baucus and Jon Tester, all Democrats, and Windy Boy, who hand-delivered a letter to the president during the signing ceremony of the Tribal Law and Order Act.

What did Representative Rehberg do? Nothing other than get his name in the paper:

The USDA’s decision also met with praise from Montana’s elected officials, including U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont.

"This is a positive step for the families and farms that are putting their lives back together," Rehberg said.

Great work again, Representative Rehberg.