Those who followed President Biden’s State of the Union were treated to Biden delivering a classic political sucker punch. The Republicans stepped right into it. The topic was Social Security and Medicare, and the sucker punch he delivered was revealing Republican’s long history of trying to reduce, eliminate, and privatize these popular retirement programs. Only the most recent of which is Republican Senator Rick Scott’s proposal to place a five-year “Sunset” provision on these programs along with others.
Despite the boos and hisses from the likes of Marjorie Taylor Greene, Biden remained cool and in control of the exchange. Really not too tough since even those who are not paying close attention know the Republican Party has opposed Social Security and Medicare since the beginning. Though they have been largely unsuccessful, they keep plugging away, trying to undermine the most successful anti-poverty programs in American history. And Biden responded, tongue in cheek, that he was glad we had reached “consensus” on supporting Social Security and Medicare.
Republican proclamations that these programs are failing have been with us since the 1930s. Time and time again they have proven to be false. Time and time again the Republicans have gone back to the drawing board seeking new ways to undermine and eliminate Social Security. Time and time again they have sought ways to privatize Medicare– without success.
Make no mistake about it. The Republicans will continue their attack on senior citizens. Daines, Zinke and Rosendale would like nothing better than getting at the money in these programs to sprinkle around among their rich donor friends. Just ask them. But listen carefully because, just like Republicans everywhere, their answer will begin with, “Of course we support Social Security and Medicare but. . . .” Yeah right guys.
We’ve just entered Week 3 of the 2023 Legislative Session, and boy has it been eventful. Republicans have floated a number of bad bills, many of which have already been abandoned due to public backlash. Although attacks on Indigenous sovereignty and medical privacy have grabbed headlines, there are GOOD things happening too.
Let’s take a look at a few bills that will help Montanans.
Senator MaryAnn Dunwell (D- SD42) and Jonathan Karfen (D-HD96) have drafted HB 252 which seeks to increase access to mental health services for Montana youth. Increasing mental health access is literally a matter of life or death. Montana has the 3rd highest suicide rate in the nation. Bills like this one can help protect our kids and keep them alive.
Dunwell has been busy and is already facing significant pushback from shady Republicans.Republicans killed her floor amendment to increase legislative transparency.The proposed amendment would have required legal review notes be attached to each bill. These notes are important because when the Leg passes laws that are unconstitutional or otherwise illegal, Montana taxpayers foot the bill. Last session Rs passed several laws that they knew wouldn’t hold up to judicial scrutiny and ultimately lost in court. Preventing access to these legal notes is an indication that they plan to waste our time and money this time around too.
Kelly Kortum (D- HD65) introduced HB201 to raise the minimum wage, combatting the inflation that has brought many Montanans closer to poverty. Kortum also introduced a bill draft that would protect renters. The bill would require rental application fees be refunded for applicants who aren’t selected for the rental unit. In another shady Republican move, this bill has been sent to the wrong committee- the Judiciary committee- where it is clear that Rs intend to kill it.
Representative S.J. Howell (D-HD95) introduced their bill to increase access to childcare. HD 238 supports the Best Beginnings program, a vital resource for working families in need of daycare.
So let’s round that up. We’ve got Democrats fighting for working Montanans who deserve a living wage, protecting kids through access to mental health services, helping parents access childcare, and assuring our government is following the law.
This is only a small slice of the action so far. What is abundantly clear is that Democrats are pursuing issues important to Montanans. Republicans are pursuing an extremist agenda that diminishes our freedoms and wastes our tax dollars. You get what you vote for.
Our state has a rich and deep labor history. Individuals began joining together to collectively advocate for themselves and their workplaces years before Montana even became a state. That’s right, Montana unions and the spirit of collective action has been “Montana” even before Montana was Montana.
Fast forward to present, and Montana and its citizens are still heavily steeped in labor tradition and philosophy, even for our non-unionized neighbors. Montana is the ONLY state in the union with worker protections enshrined in our laws- one of the biggest being Montana’s wrongful termination law. Montana is the only non at-will state in the U S of A, meaning that outside of a designated probationary period, law requires the employer to have just cause for terminating an employee. Montana is truly unique and has always valued the labor and contributions of its sons and daughters through worker protections like just cause laws and the right to unionize and collectively bargain. Even after Federal and State lawmakers over the decades have made it their mission to diminish the strength of unions and therefore effectively stifle the voices of the working citizens of Montana (ya know, the people they work for), the labor movement perseveres.
OUR RIGHTS UNDER ATTACK
The 2021 Legislature saw many an anti-labor bill, but like a true David and Goliath story, Montanans came out in droves to demonstrate our love for our fellow citizens, their labor, and the best vehicle workers have to maintain a proverbial and sometimes literal seat at the table- unions. Now, make no mistake, no one thought the detractors who put millions of dollars into stifling the voices of the average worker were just going to go away. Much like a mosquito, they continue to annoy and look for any opportunistic moment to swoop in and feed on the lifeblood of our state. Oh, and by the way, they dont always play fair.
On Tuesday January 16th, 2023, the house judiciary committee will hear HB 216 (Mercer- R- HD 46). Some of the things in the bill are redundant and have already been secured at the federal level with the Janus decision, and at the state level with last sessions HB 289 (generally revise labor laws relating to employee associations- passed), others are just reintroductions of parts and pieces of bills that failed in the last session. Let’s start with the redundancies and a little back story. Section 2(2) states “A public employee may not be required to become or remain a member of, or financially support, a labor organization as a condition of obtaining or retaining public employment.” Prior to the Janus v AFSME decision issued by the US Supreme Court in 2018, unions were able to collect an agency fee from non members, which was essentially a small fee the union could charge non-members to help cover the costs of the work that they are still required to do whether the individual working in the respective collective bargaining unit chose to be a member or not. These were not dues, and the fee payer was not a member or required to be, the individual was simply paying a fair share fee for the services rendered. The Supreme Court found this to be unconstitutional (it’s not, but that’s for another day) and ordered all public service unions still charging this agency fee to stop. The TL;DR here is that Montana’s public employees were never required to join. Post Janus, they can also get a free ride on the backs of their coworkers. This was further codified last session in HB 289.
Lets now go to Section 2(3) which states “A public employee may cancel the public employee’s membership and cease financial support of a labor organization at any time”. With a superficial glance, this seems like a non-issue to some, but let’s dive into this line from a purely financial and budgetary point of view and remove the union of it all momentarily. We all have a budget to which we adhere to. We know roughly how much income we have coming in per month, and roughly how much goes out to pay for our shelter, food, etc. You rely on the income to pay your bills. If you lost a portion of your income at random intervals throughout the year, that would throw a major wrench in your short term and long term plans, goals, or simply what you need to keep your head above the proverbial water. Now let’s put this back into a union frame. Any person, business, organization, etc cannot effectively function with that amount of budgetary uncertainty. This is why unions have designated drop periods, usually based on the calendar year, but sometimes based on other things like the date you joined, etc. It’s not shady, it’s common sense.
Now on to Section 2(4), as well as several line items in Section 3:
‘A public employer may not collect dues from compensation paid to a public employee on behalf of a labor organization without the annual affirmative consent of the public employee”. I think it’s obvious by now how the process works, but for the sake of information, let’s be very clear. An employee is hired, they are given the choice to become a member, and if for whatever reason they chose to drop, they typically have a window each year in which to do so. This line and basically ALL of section 3 aim to cripple union membership by imposing unnecessary bureaucratic obstacles in the way of the freedom to choose to associate. In the most simplistic terms, this would require an individual to OPT IN every year, rather than ongoing membership with a yearly OPT OUT period. Essentially, each collective bargaining unit in every public employees union would need to recertify and defend their right to exist every year. It also inserts the employer in questionable and potentially federally illegal positions by requiring them by law to insert themselves in the union-membership business and relationship.
PLAYING FAIR
HB 216 is scheduled to be heard by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday January 17th. If there is any confusion on why the Judiciary Committee is hearing a labor bill, let me break that down. First, per page 37 of the House Rules, this bill is undoubtedly in the wrong committee. Page 37 states, in part, the following:
…legislation dealing with an enumerated subject must be referred to a standing committee as follows:
Business and Labor: Alcohol regulation other than taxation… labor unions; … workers’ compensation.
State Administration: Administrative rules; … state employees; state employee benefits; … voting.
So why is it being heard in the wrong committee? Well, because it’s more likely to pass in Judiciary than either of the appropriate committees. Slick, right?
TAKE ACTION
So what can we do to hold our legislators accountable to follow the rules and take the proper channels to do their legislating? Tomorrow, Monday January 16th, 2023 during the 1 PM house floor session, there will be a motion to refer HB 216 to the appropriate committee. Make your voice heard by contacting your legislator and asking them to support the motion to refer BEFORE 1 PM on Monday January 16th.
Utility Slug – noun- Politicians and lobbyists who routinely advocate for the interests of monopoly utilities and their stockholders over the interests of small customers and consumers. Synonyms: corporate hack, sell out, shill, swindler
What is really happening here has a lot to do with the Colstrip plants in Eastern Montana. These plants were built around 50 years ago by a consortium of utility corporations located in the Northwest. For years, the Montana Power Company operated and took a share of the power from the plants and made sure that the “Colstrip Partners” were getting their share of the output.
The old Montana Power Company went bankrupt after it was “deregulated” by Republicans in the legislature and the Racicot Administration. After a long period of economic upheaval NorthWestern Energy emerged from the ashes of the deregulation and took on a large (expensive) chunk of power from the Colstrip complex as well as assuming responsibility for operating the plants.
Everybody knows coal power is a bad deal—except the Montana legislature
Today coal has become a marginal and very costly source of power. Part of that is associated with the realization that coal is a major source of green house gasses and continuing to burn it is, well. . .suicidal. More importantly, the increasing availability of renewable power that is much more efficient than burning coal as well as advances in “fracking” technology that has increased our supply of natural gas has left coal as the least desirable and most expensive source of energy out there. Today there is no market for coal plants or the power they produce. On top of that, the plants also carry significant liability for environmental clean up.
Most of the Colstrip partners have accepted that getting out of the Colstrip mess was going to be expensive, but that it was better to get out of the deal, accept the losses, and move on. But NorthWestern has been slow to make a similar conclusion. Through the PSC and in the legislature, NorthWestern Energy has been trying one way or another to put the public on the hook both for buying expensive and dirty coal power and for the clean-up that will come. (Odd fact— the town of Colstrip already has to pipe water from 30 miles away because it’s wells have been contaminated by the Colstrip plants.) Most of those efforts have been thwarted by a constitutionally-created agency called the Montana Consumer Counsel, which was created by the Montana Constitution to represent consumers in the legal arena and in the legislature.
Meanwhile, back to Fitpatrick’s schemes
Fast forward to Steve Fitzpatrick and his legislative shenanigans. (Another Odd fact—Fitpatrick’s father, John Fitzpatrick, is a long time lobbyist for NorthWestern Energy and just got elected to the Montana House of Representatives.) In the last session of the legislature, Fitzpatrick introduced a bill which prohibited the Consumer Counsel from taking positions on bills without the permission of the Legislative Consumer Committee. That bill failed . . .thankfully.
Now Steve Fitzpatrick is the chairman of the senate rules committee. And lo and behold, Fitzpatrick is proposing a legislative rule to require the Montana Consumer Counsel to get permission from the Legislative Consumer Committee — which Fitzpatrick has more ability to control — before taking a position on any legislation. If Fitzpatrick and his pals at Northwestern Energy succeed, Montana consumers will be paying for these old, dirty coal plants for decades into the future.
The Great Falls Tribune is a shadow of its former self. Back in the day, it was the best paper in the state, routinely fielding solid reporters like Chuck Johnson, Mike Dennison, and John Adams. Today, it is short-staffed, has no editorial page, and has rapidly declining subscriber rates. Most print papers across the country find themselves facing similar issues. There is little doubt that the Tribune and many other papers will not be around in ten years. The question is what, if anything, replaces the daily local newspaper?
The good news is that local papers, mostly online and “free” (contributions and subscriptions encouraged), have been springing up across the state. These include The Flathead Beacon, Missoula Current, and here in Great Falls, The Electric. In addition, we now have two state-wide online papers, The Daily Montanan and Montana Free Press. Both of these papers have solid reporting and provide in-depth coverage of many issues. The Daily Montanan also has regular commentary and guest editorial content.
Check out these links for online papers and consider subscribing or contributing this holiday season.
Kari Rosenleaf is running for office for our children’s future
Deciding to run for office is a different path for all candidates. When I first met Kari, I knew she was a public education teacher but I didn’t know why she wanted to put her neck out there and make change. We talked and bonded over the importance of public education to provide opportunity. Kari is a special education teacher for Great Falls Public Schools and she talked about the challenges and importance of that role in enriching and improving her students’ future. After our discussion, I knew Kari Rosenleaf was the right person to represent House District 26 in Great Falls. She knows the struggles of working families and she wants to support policies that will lessen those struggles. I’m Kari’s campaign treasurer and I wanted to share why I’m voting for Kari and why I think you should too. Below is a summary of a discussion Kari and I had about her candidacy.
Why did you decide to be a special education teacher?
Public education has always been important to me. I received all of my K-12 public education here in Great Falls. When I moved out of state and was attending college, I saw how much better prepared I was than my peers. That comes from an investment in education. And that’s why it is so important to me. I’ve always had an interest in becoming a teacher. When I was growing up, my brother had a health condition that required special education accommodations. I wanted to be a teacher for students like him.
I’ve been a special education teacher in our school system for a decade, and the great thing about my role is the ability to build relationships with my families and students. I get to have my students for about seven years, unless they switch schools. That consistency and longevity, helps me to more effectively push for their goals.
What made you decide to run for office?
Well, I’m a member of MFPE, the Montana Federation of Public Employees. MFPE is Montana’s largest union and the country’s most diverse union. During the last legislative session, with a Republican governor and a Republican controlled legislature, we saw so many bills that attacked workers’ rights and public education. Our union helped keep its member informed on these bills and it was so frustrating. We were fighting an up-hill battle. I wanted to be the one in the room voting for what helped people rather than having to try to convince legislators to do the right thing and vote against these damaging bills.
If you were elected, why would you be a good legislator?
When the Republican state government turns down federal funding for our schools, that directly hurts our local students. When public employees fully fund their pension plan and the state tries to use that money as a piggy bank, that threatens the stability of that fund.
Everyone is concerned about rising prices and tax increases. While some of those issues have to be addressed at the federal level, we can help at the state level. For one, large companies need to pay their fair share. They benefit from running their businesses there, they need to help support the infrastructure and people that makes that possible.
It probably doesn’t need to be said, but I’ll stand up for worker’s rights in the legislature. Unions protect workers, raise wages and are good for our state.
Why are unions so important?
When I worked as an ambulance driver and EMT in Great Falls, we voted in a union. The company brought in union busters and the union was never able to get a contract in place. But during that struggle, the company fixed numerous issues that had spurred the union fight including addressing safety issues, raising workers’ wages, and stopping wage theft. Unions pressure companies to do the right thing.
