tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30793735117434831892024-03-12T12:10:41.132-06:00Barrett for SD 45Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.comBlogger123125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-38461593657790770612018-07-04T00:42:00.000-06:002018-07-05T12:45:58.633-06:00A Lake Woebegone Problem<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">Back in 2001, when we were colleagues in the Economics Department at the University of Montana, Tom Power and I wrote a book - <i>Post Cowboy Economics</i> - in which we tried to pick apart the relationships between environmental protection, natural resource exploitation and family incomes in the Mountain West. One of the troubling questions that we had to confront was why incomes in places like Missoula were so much lower than they were in the rest of the United States. And the answer, at least in part, lay in geographical differences in the cost of living (COL for short).</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">The simple fact was that when we compared the incomes of Missoula families to the incomes of other Americans, those other Americans were living predominately in pretty large cities. And while they typically took home bigger pay checks than Missoulians, they also had higher living costs, particularly when it came to housing. In fact, when Tom and I did the math, to a pretty substantial degree, the earnings disadvantage from living in Missoula and not, say, Los Angeles, was offset by the lower cost of living in the Garden City.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Now flash forward to today’s Missoulian, which reports that the Missoula Economic Partnership has just released a <a href="http://www.missoulapartnership.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Missoula_Final-Report__v7.pdf"><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">study of the city’s competitivenes</span></a>s in attracting new business, which includes, among its findings, that while Missoula families have incomes below the national average, their living costs, rather than being low, are <i>above</i> the national average. Evidently, what worked for Tom and me a couple of decades ago just isn’t working any more.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Or is it? </span><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">After all, don’t most American still live in big, expensive cities and pull down wages commensurate with those high living costs?</span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-size: 11px;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">Well, yes they do, but here’s the problem</span>: when we talk about average earnings and the average cost of living, we’re talking about different kinds of averages. US average family earnings are calculated across all the <i>families</i> in the nation, while average cost of living is calculated across all the <i>cities</i> in the nation, regardless of each city’s population. That means that New York City, with a COL index of 166, and Missoula, with a COL index of 103, count equally in computing the US average COL (100), even though New Yorkers outnumber Missoulians by about 100 to 1. If big, high COL cities carried more weight in computing the national average, that average would be higher, and Missoula would come in below, not above it.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Here’s an entirely hypothetical numerical example of the problem. Suppose we have three cities; call them Big, Medium and Small. There are 300,000 families in Big that earn an average of $57,150 per year and face a COL index of 120. There are 30,000 families in Medium, with an average income of $50,000 and a COL index of 105, and 20,000 families in Small, with average incomes of $35,700 and a COL index of 75.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Now the first thing to notice here is that real incomes (that is, income adjusted for the cost of living) are the same in all three of these communities. $35,700 goes just as far at the store in Small as $50,000 does in Medium and $57,150 does in Big. </span><br />
<br />
The next thing to notice is that the average COL index for these three cities is 100 (that’s the average of 120, 105 and 75). So by that calculation Medium has a cost of living 5 percent above the national average and Big's COL is 20 percent above the average. Viewed in terms of families instead of cities, the situation is a little like Lake Woebegone's. When it comes to cost of living, nearly all families - 330 out of 350 thousand - are above average.<br />
<br />
The last thing to notice is that if we average the incomes of all 350,000 families living in the three cities, the result is $55,790, so income in Medium is below the national average.* And there you have it. Medium, like Missoula, has below average income and above average living costs. That sounds like there’s a significant economic disadvantage to living in Medium. But there’s not. In this example, at any rate, real incomes in Medium are the same as real incomes anywhere else.</div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">To be clear, I am not claiming here that the difference between average income in Missoula and the rest of the country can be entirely accounted for by differences in living costs. But there is a sort of Lake Woebegone problem with the way the MEP report measures COL. The fact is that for most Americans, who inhabit p</span>laces like San Francisco or Chicago or Seattle or New York, Missoula would be a relatively cheap place to live, and if they were contemplating coming to Missoula to take a job in some spanking new startup, the cost of living here would be the least of their worries.</div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">*To calculate average family income for the 350,000 families, you need to compute the total income they earn and divide by 350,000. The total income earned by families in any city equals (average income) x (number of families), so for Big, for example, total income is 300,000 x $57,150. For all three cities the total is (300,000 x $57,150) + (30,000 x $50,000) + (20,000 x $$35,700). Divide that number by 350,000 and you get $55,790.</span></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-75735661766545393522018-05-31T14:24:00.000-06:002018-06-04T14:07:46.078-06:00Reefer, Crashes and Boatloads of Cash<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="9k7tv" data-offset-key="cc8k7-0-0" style="caret-color: rgb(29, 33, 41); color: #1d2129; font-family: system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ".SFNSText-Regular", sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cc8k7-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="cc8k7-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">Given Montana's relatively bad traffic fatality statistics, it seems to me that we can't promote legal recreational marijuana use without at least understanding what impact it might have on public safety on the highways. And in that regard the statistics cited by Pew in a <a href="https://bit.ly/2J7X3IU">new report</a> might give us pause. But I have my doubts about how useful they are.</span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cc8k7-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Essentially, what Colorado, Washington and other states that have legalized recreational use are reporting is a pretty big increase in the number of drivers who were using (or had recently used) marijuana when they got killed in an accident. That's suggestive, but it doesn't prove much. What we really want to know is whether, when you smoke a joint or pop an edible and get behind the wheel, you’re more likely than you otherwise would be to end up killing yourself or somebody else. And the way to answer that question is to compare the fatal accident rate for all the drivers who are under the influence of marijuana with that of all the drivers who aren't under the influence of anything. Even that comparison could be misleading, of course, because the universes of using and non-using drivers may differ from one another in some relevant respect, such as age. That's a typical confounding variable problem, and it needs to be accounted for, but in any case, we don't have the data needed to make the comparison in the first place. </span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cc8k7-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">That doesn't mean that the question can be ignored. Pew reports that in 2016, of all the fatally injured drivers tested, 38 percent tested positive for marijuana use alone (the issue gets a lot more complicated when you have to take into account cases where the driver was using marijuana and drinking, or using other drugs, at the same time). On the assumption that drivers are usually tested when there is some reason to suspect they were impaired, the rate of marijuana use among all fatally injured drivers is probably less than 38 percent. That may yet sound pretty high, but whatever it is, we still don't know how it compares to the rate of use among drivers who don't have fatal accidents. It would surprise me if 38 percent of all the drivers out on the road tested positive, but what do I know? And as Pew points out, coming up with the right data is further complicated by the fact that drivers can "test positive" for marijuana long after any effects that would affect driving have worn off.</span></div>
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="cc8k7-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I doubt that in what remains of my political career (one more session in the Montana Senate) I will ever have the opportunity to vote on legalization, so my opinion doesn't count for much. But for what it's worth, it seems to me that decriminalization is a no-brainer. It's a monumental waste of time and resources to pursue, arrest, convict and incarcerate people for smoking a little reefer. When it comes to full on, Colorado style legalization, however, and particularly the promotion of recreational use, I have some some concerns - about public safety, for one thing, and about the health impacts of the very powerful marijuana available in the shops, for another. And the last thing in the world I think we should do is legalize because we can then collect a boatload of tax dollars. We shouldn't make ourselves financially dependent on the sale of a product that may turn out to be a stone around our necks. We did that with coal, and you can see how that worked out.</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="9k7tv" data-offset-key="30om-0-0" style="caret-color: rgb(29, 33, 41); color: #1d2129; font-family: system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ".SFNSText-Regular", sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="30om-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="30om-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<br />
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="30om-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="30om-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="30om-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="9k7tv" data-offset-key="2t85i-0-0" style="caret-color: rgb(29, 33, 41); color: #1d2129; font-family: system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ".SFNSText-Regular", sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="2t85i-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="2t85i-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="9k7tv" data-offset-key="bmk9-0-0" style="caret-color: rgb(29, 33, 41); color: #1d2129; font-family: system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ".SFNSText-Regular", sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="bmk9-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="bmk9-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="9k7tv" data-offset-key="baoqc-0-0" style="caret-color: rgb(29, 33, 41); color: #1d2129; font-family: system-ui, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, ".SFNSText-Regular", sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<br /></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com20tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-27042062723016794022018-04-30T11:52:00.000-06:002018-04-30T11:52:09.777-06:00Ships in the Night<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">Talk about ships passing in the night!</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">The Missoulian today reports on the <a href="http://helenair.com/news/government-and-politics/gop-senate-candidates-seek-balance-in-natural-resource-policies/article_59ac7054-bf68-59b6-b03a-a741b4140be5.html#tracking-source=home-top-story-1"><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">Republican US Senate candidates’ positions</span></a> on the perennial question of the choice between economic health and environmental protection. And in the same issue, there’s a piece out of the Flathead explaining just how important access to a high quality environment and <a href="http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/room-to-roam-outdoor-recreation-driving-population-boom-in-rural/article_4cd9e9a0-96ae-5836-ab91-3956615139fd.html"><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">outdoor recreation</span></a> is to the health of Montana’s rural economies.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">As politicians of all stripes usually do, the Republican candidates (Rosendale, Fagg, Downing and Olszewski) want you to know they can give you whatever you want. Reconciling the competing demands of the economy and the environment is simply a matter of striking the right balance between protecting natural areas and outdoor recreation, on the one hand, and providing jobs in extractive natural resource industries on the other. To see it any other way, they tell you, is to embrace a false dichotomy.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Now there is a false dichotomy here, but it’s not what they think it is. It resides, rather, in comparing the <i>benefits</i> created by protecting the environment with the labor <i>costs </i>of exploiting it for commodity production. Those benefits and costs are apples and oranges.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">If politicians want to fret about the jobs that will be created by using natural resources in different ways - and it seems that that’s about all politicians want to fret about - they can have at it. Maximizing job creation and labor costs is not really a very sound basis for managing resources - it’s a far cry from finding their highest and best use - but if you are going to do it, you ought to look at the jobs created by <i>every</i> use, not just resource extraction. And as the Flathead article makes clear, protecting the environment and the opportunity to recreate creates lots of jobs. Not because of commercial activity associated with recreation - guiding, fishing gear sales, snowmobile rentals and so forth - but because people want to live and work and do business in nice places where they can have fun outdoors. It simply isn’t true that protecting the environment means people will have to go without jobs. On the contrary, they gravitate toward high quality environments and bring their jobs with them.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Another way of comparing alternative natural resource uses is by weighing the benefit each use provides. In the case of extractive uses, that’s pretty straight forward: the benefit is the market value - or better yet, the market value net of production cost - of the commodities extracted (coal, for example, or timber). In the case of conservation, the benefits - again, best measured net of production costs - are the streams of environmental services (clean water, wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, and so forth) that are preserved. Those services may not have a market price, but they do have substantial economic value. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">This comparison of net benefits, if policy makers were willing to engage in it, </span><i style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">would </i><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">drive resources to their highest and best use. But as long as they insist on comparing the benefits of doing one thing with the costs of doing another, we are going to get resource management decisions that are all wrong.</span><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-47627316390434381502018-03-27T14:01:00.000-06:002018-03-27T14:01:16.361-06:00Implement the Clean Power Plan<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">While the President and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt have made no secret of their hostility to the Paris Accords, the Clean Power Plan, or for that matter just about any other initiative to address the climate change crisis, the EPA is required by law to hold public hearings before its scraps or alters the rules, promulgated under the Obama administration, that created the Clean Power Plan. The following is a text of a letter to Director Pruitt in support of the CPP from 32 Montana legislators, submitted as written testimony at the EPA hearing in Gillette, Wyoming today. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>March 27, 2018</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Environmental Protection Agency</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Washington, DC 20004</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Dear Administrator Pruitt:</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>As elected members of the Montana State Legislature, we write in response to your request for comment on the proposed repeal and replacement of the Clean Power Plan (CPP). In our opinion, any weakening of the CPP would be a grave mistake and would seriously threaten the health and wellbeing of Americans and indeed our neighbors throughout the world.</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Since the CPP was first proposed by the prior administration, evidence of the extent of climate change, its relationship to carbon emissions, and the severity of its effects has grown rapidly. In the state of Montana, climate change is adversely affecting our agricultural and recreational economies and eroding the quality of the natural environment and ecosystems, which are the heritage of not just Montanans, but all Americans. The disappearance of glaciers in Glacier National Park and the increasing frequency of catastrophic wildfires on national forests are two outstanding examples.</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Globally, climate change is now clearly implicated in rising sea levels, species loss, increasing food insecurity, compromised health, and other deleterious effects that threaten the viability of the world economy and the stability of the political order. American military analysts have identified these effects of climate change as a serious national security threat.</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Since it became apparent that the current administration did not intend to move forward with the CPP, several states have taken it upon themselves to impose firm, quantifiable and verifiable reductions on their carbon emissions. We applaud the effort of those states, but we are concerned that leaving control of carbon emissions to individual states acting in isolation is unlikely to result in adequate emission reductions. The reason in clear: while the benefits of emissions reductions demonstrably outweigh the costs, those benefits accrue nationally and internationally, while the costs are born locally. It is not reasonable to expect any one state to incur the costs of providing substantial benefits outside its borders unless it is acting in concert with other states and benefiting in turn from those states’ efforts. Achieving such concerted action clearly requires direction in the form of a national policy such as the CPP.</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>There are several economic aspects of the CPP that we urge you to consider. One is that while efforts (such as the CPP) to control emissions are often perceived to be costly and accordingly, economically inefficient, the fact is that there is now extensive research that demonstrates that the economic magnitude of the damages avoided when emissions are reduced far outweighs the costs of achieving the reductions in the first place. It is clear that in Montana, for example, failing to arrest climate change will seriously damage both the agricultural and outdoor recreation industries which are significant contributors to the state’s economy.</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>When the CPP was first proposed, several national opposition studies predicted that its implementation would impose unacceptably high costs on the national economy. Since that time, however, emissions from the electric power sector have dropped at a rate comparable to that contemplated in the CPP, strictly as a result of the cost advantage conferred by switching from coal to natural gas for thermal generation and replacing fossil fuel generation with renewables. This suggests that implementing the CPP would be far less costly than critics predicted, and greater reductions could be achieved at acceptable cost.</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>As legislators in a coal producing state, we are aware of the potential impacts of the CPP on communities that depend on coal for their livelihoods. We believe that the country and energy companies have an obligation to assist such communities in transitioning to a lower carbon and less coal dependent energy system. Indeed, this is an issue which we already face in Montana and which we have confronted and will continue to confront in the legislative arena. But we also believe that we have an equally compelling obligation to address the very serious threat of climate change, which we cannot do without Federal direction such as that provided for in the Clean Power Plan.</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Sincerely,</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px; text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></i></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Dick Barrett, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Carlie Boland, Great Falls</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Jill Cohenour, East Helena<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Tom Facey, Missoula</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Jen Gross, Billings<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Margaret MacDonald, Billings</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Sue Malek, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Nate McConnell, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Mike Phillips, Bozeman<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator JP Pomnichowski, Bozeman</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Diane Sands, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Frank Smith, Poplar</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Senator Lea Whitford, Cut Bank<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Kim Abbott, Helena</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Bryce Bennett<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span>, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Laurie Bishop, Livingston</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Ellie Hill Smith, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Willis Curdy, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Amanda Curtis, Butte<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Mary Ann Dunwell, Helena</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Jenny Eck, Helena<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Janet Ellis, Helena</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Dave Fern, Whitefish<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Moffie Funk, Helena</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Jim Hamilton, Bozeman<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Denise Hayman, Bozeman</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Shane Morigeau, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Andrea Olsen, Missoula</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Rae Peppers, Lame Deer<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Jean Price, Great Falls</i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><i>Rep. Marilyn Ryan, Missoula<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space: pre;"> </span></i></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<i style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">Rep. Tom Woods, Bozeman</i></div>
<div>
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-4419198825736169212018-02-13T15:16:00.000-07:002018-02-15T23:14:29.052-07:00Silver Linings<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Rep. Wendy McKamey is obviously on the right track when she urges Congress, in today’s Missoulian, to address the <a href="http://missoulian.com/opinion/columnists/addressing-national-park-system-maintenance-will-create-montana-jobs/article_6d15b881-465a-5047-bc64-8f80adef7466.html"><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">critical backlog of deferred maintenance</span></a> in the nation’s national parks. And folks down the Bitterroot are right to be alarmed by the President’s intention, in the budget he sent to Congress yesterday, to <a href="http://missoulian.com/news/local/epa-program-to-remove-pollutants-from-rivers-streams-is-endangered/article_086faff4-6666-5dd1-88b7-430353814438.html"><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">zero out an EPA program</span></a> which restores degraded waterways and improves water quality. But as critical as these efforts are, the arguments that McKamey and the Bitterrooters are making for them are really pretty perverse. For McKamey, the “silver lining” in the enormous task of restoring national parks is that it will create jobs - lots of jobs. For clean water advocates and activists in the Bitterroot, it’s the flow of dollars to contractors who repair roads that are sloughing off into creeks, or the nurseries that provide the plant stock for revegetating stream banks.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Now those are obviously good things. Construction workers need jobs, contractors need contracts, and nurseries need to sell plants. But in the final analysis, what the argument boils down to is this: these programs are a good thing <i>because</i> they will cost a lot. The implication is that if we could somehow contrive to maintain parks and rivers without creating jobs or letting contracts or buying supplies, that is, without cost, these programs would be less worthwhile. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">What’s going on here is, of course, nothing new and it would be unfair to suggest that McKamey or the water advocates invented this fallacy. On the contrary, it’s standard operating procedure, when making decisions about the use of public resources, to choose the use that has the greatest economic impact. It’s far more politically astute and makes you sound far more hard headed and fiscally prudent to defend expensive programs because they will create jobs and sales, than to claim that they will have ephemeral benefits like historical preservation or access to wildlife viewing or healthier riparian habitat. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">But advocating for a public program because it has a fat economic footprint can take you down a blind alley. There are a lot of environmental activists in Montana, for example, who argue that our stake in combatting climate change is the damage that will otherwise be done to our outdoor, agricultural and tourism economies. Obviously, they know that there is much, much more a stake than the jobs of fishing guides or motel workers or farmers, but it’s those jobs that they hope will get the attention of legislators and editorial writers. But walk down that alley and anyone can follow you. Once jobs become the only thing that counts, the loss of jobs for coal miners or oil rig workers becomes a perfectly plausible and appropriate reason for <i>opposing</i> any effort to arrest climate change. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Indeed, if we’re going to arrest climate change, what’s to stop us from worrying about the loss of jobs for the construction workers who will move Miami to higher ground if sea levels keep on rising? That may sound crazy, but isn’t it something like what McKamey is implying? One of the “benefits” of neglecting maintenance and letting our national parks go to rack and ruin is the jobs that will be created cleaning the mess up!</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">What gets lost in this obsession with jobs is the fact that what both McKamey and the Bitterroot water folks are really talking about is the provision and maintenance of infrastructure. Not in tthe limited sense of bridges or roads or airports, but in the expansive sense of the stock of created and natural public capital. It’s stuff that contributes to our wellbeing just like bridges and roads do, and it needs to be attended to for that reason. But it’s not being attended to; it’s being abandoned, at least by the President. And he’s abandoning it at a time when he says, not very convincingly, that he wants to<i> rebuild </i>the national infrastructure. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Ah well, looking for consistency in the intentions of Donald Trump, now that <i>is</i> a job.</span></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-12635122518235763632018-02-09T12:43:00.001-07:002018-02-09T16:05:01.520-07:00A Parting of the Ways on Guns<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">I like all the candidates who are running for Congress in the Democratic primary. On almost every issue their hearts and brains are in the right places. I’ve worked closely with a couple of them in the legislature and respect their abilities. Some are personal friends on whom I wouldn’t wish the onerous task of raising money, campaigning tirelessly, winning a primary, and taking on and beating Greg Gianforte.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">But when it comes to the issue of guns, we reach a parting of the ways.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">At a candidate forum in Missoula last night, when they were asked whether they would support expanded background checks for gun sales, all five Democratic candidates said that they would not. All of them expressed appropriate alarm about gun violence and advocated for better enforcement of gun laws already on the books. But when it came to background checks for the thousands and thousands of guns sold privately or at gun shows, no deal. As far as I am concerned, that’s an utterly indefensible position.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">There’s no mystery, of course, about what’s going on here. I was sitting next to a veteran and venerable Montana political reporter at the forum, and when I began to gnash my teeth and mutter as one candidate after another caved in on the question, she looked at me like I had lost my mind. Never, in her experience, had a Montana Democrat been willing to risk challenging the NRA. There was nothing new to see here folks, so move along.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">She’s probably right and I get that, but I am not convinced that what the NRA wants, and what the public thinks is needed, are the same thing. I’m guessing that for most people it is painfully obvious that tougher enforcement of existing background check laws, which apply to sales by licensed dealers, is going to do absolutely nothing to prevent people <i>who we all agree shouldn’t have them </i>from buying guns on-line, or through a classified ad in the newspaper, or at a gun show. In fact, stricter enforcement of existing laws will only lead to greater resort to those loopholes.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Part of the problem here is that we tend to view the issue of effective background checks through the lens of the terrible mass killings that have become a regular part of our national life. Every time some madman or abuser or deranged high school student shoots and kills churchgoers, or fires into a crowd at a concert or club, or murders a classroom full of kids, we ask where the guns came from, and too often the answer is that they were purchased legally, or taken from the family gun closet, or bought on the street. And from this we shake our heads and sadly conclude, once again, that expanded background checks couldn’t have prevented this most recent mass shooting.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">And it’s true: expanded background checks will not eradicate mass shootings. But that’s not the point. Mass shootings, as terrible and visible as they are, are the tip of the iceberg. There are about 30,000 gun deaths in the United States every year, including suicides. We have far and away the highest incidence of gun violence in the world, except for countries being run by drug gangs or torn apart by civil wars. It’s those countries whose company we keep when it comes to killing people with guns. And killing is just part of the story; there’s also armed robbery, drive-by shootings, road rage, intimidation, and the list goes on.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">The fact is that the United States is awash in guns and there is a well documented and well understood process by which those guns flow from the hands of legitimate, law abiding owners into the hands of people who shouldn’t have them and will use them to commit crimes. Comprehensive background checks obviously can’t prevent gun crimes, but they can staunch that flow of guns into the wrong hands and reduce the astronomical rate of gun violence in this country. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">And that’s something I would hope any Democrat running for Congress could get behind.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-13710281274490501442017-10-18T16:47:00.000-06:002017-10-18T16:47:32.160-06:00A Perfect Storm<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;"><span style="font-family: Helvetica Neue;">I</span><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">f you’ve been paying attention at all to the state’s current budget crisis, you already know that legislative Republicans have been doing their damnedest to deny any responsibility for fixing the mess, let alone acknowledging they created it in the first place. As far as they’re concerned, it’s up to the governor to balance the budget with brutal spending cuts, and they refuse to recognize, or admit, that those cuts could do serious damage to essential government programs.</span></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Earlier this week the Republican House leadership attempted to rationalize this remarkable callousness in a Missoulian guest column claiming that “<a href="http://missoulian.com/opinion/columnists/montana-has-spending-problem-not-revenue-problem/article_470b9c15-d5aa-540c-8f96-81eeea5c7ba5.html"><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">Montana has a spending problem</span></a>, not a revenue problem.” It was a valiant effort, I suppose, but what it produced was a perfect storm of shoddy reasoning, mangled facts and selective memory. This gets a little tedious, but bear with me.</span></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">According to these Republican luminaries, the “root cause of Montana’s budget challenges” is that the state is “simply spending too much money,” and by way of evidence, they cite the fact that since 2012, general fund revenue is up 14 percent while spending is up by 32 percent. Now if we are trying to figure out if we have a “spending problem” or a “revenue problem,” by itself this comparison is of no earthly use. The numbers no more support a claim that we are spending too much than that we are not raising enough revenue to meet our needs. </span></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;"><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">And there’s another problem here: it’s always possible to cherry pick starting and ending dates for a comparison like this that tend to prove whatever point you are trying to make, and in fact, that’s what these guys did in this instance. Look at the top chart below, which shows General Fund revenue and expenditures since 2002.* In 2012 taxes exceeded expenditure, and this year, 2017, it was the other way around. Pick two years like that, and necessarily (it’s just arithmetic) expenditures are going to grow faster than revenue. But what the top chart also shows is that in the long run, expenditures and revenue track each other pretty closely. And how could it be otherwise? We are required by the constitution to balance the budget, which means, in the end, that we cannot spend more that we take in.</span></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">If a transitory imbalance between spending and revenue can’t really tell us where our “problem” lies, what can? Well, to me it seems reasonable to say we have a spending problem if we’re spending more than we need to or can afford, given the productivity of the state’s economy and the income it‘s capable of generating. And we have a revenue problem if the revenue we are collecting falls behind what we can afford and is needed to fund essential programs.</span><span style="font-kerning: none;"></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">Republican leaders seem to kind-of get that, when they claim that revenue growth has been adequate because it has outstripped both inflation and the growth of population combined. But that combination is not a good measure of the level of economic activity, income, or what we can afford; those are best measured by gross state product, which is basically the total value of everything - goods and services - that we produce in the state and ultimately, the source of our material well being. Look at the second chart: since 2002, the growth of state spending and revenue has fallen significantly behind the growth of gross state product. There is no indication here that we have spent beyond our means; on the contrary, we could afford to do more, and we certainly can afford to do what we are doing now. </span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA_ZrssB6l4rRjnl5md9Gw8NKUZdzWd4tjNwePTTPGHrQfyaNKs2fKndoHDRBNGlN9PyVx7Xnlfk2NSyAv4xPBSlWctI7eRcPOfuUTUxXZIOLqYDI4CovjwGLx-7oNXIvbSTRUCIt_UQ3c/s1600/Screen+Shot+2017-10-18+at+11.12.08+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="328" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA_ZrssB6l4rRjnl5md9Gw8NKUZdzWd4tjNwePTTPGHrQfyaNKs2fKndoHDRBNGlN9PyVx7Xnlfk2NSyAv4xPBSlWctI7eRcPOfuUTUxXZIOLqYDI4CovjwGLx-7oNXIvbSTRUCIt_UQ3c/s640/Screen+Shot+2017-10-18+at+11.12.08+AM.png" width="640" /></a><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8rJCwvxoIpqr4zdEnMRFC2fT0ZzdIs9goSZ2E2FdlLlhp9bbOFx5_GUuG9uNqWXd1dojJRtNNbT658zDvtFRv4-iwel2TDfOEpYE5c1K-70TwdLSa6FfxCFnSMv4MmA-lH2cVP57N77yk/s1600/Screen+Shot+2017-10-18+at+11.15.09+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8rJCwvxoIpqr4zdEnMRFC2fT0ZzdIs9goSZ2E2FdlLlhp9bbOFx5_GUuG9uNqWXd1dojJRtNNbT658zDvtFRv4-iwel2TDfOEpYE5c1K-70TwdLSa6FfxCFnSMv4MmA-lH2cVP57N77yk/s640/Screen+Shot+2017-10-18+at+11.15.09+AM.png" width="640" /></a><span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">The House leaders also claim that 14 percent growth in revenue since 2012 must be enough because after all, “Most Montana families have not seen their income grow by 14 percent since 2012.” Where they got this factoid is anyone’s guess,** but it really doesn’t matter: the comparison of total tax collections to individual family incomes is meaningless. What <i>is</i> instructive is the fact that while total tax collections were rising by 14 percent, total personal income earned by Montanans rose by 19 percent.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">The House leadership tries to explain the glaring disconnect between a high performing economy and sluggish revenue growth by invoking what they call the “long term trend of trading high-paying natural resource jobs for lower-paying service and tourism jobs.” We might imagine that that shift has reduced average earnings and depressed tax collections, except for the fact that average earnings have risen, not fallen, and income tax collections have risen, not fallen, with respect to personal income.***</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">In the end, of course, all this Republican nonsense about a “spending problem” is intended to rid them of any responsibility for going back to Helena and working on a reasonable solution to the current budget crisis. As they see it, if the problem is spending, the solution is cuts. And if it’s cuts we need, well then the governor has the power to make them and ought to get on with the job. All he has to do is fire some of those useless, unneeded state government employees, never mind the fact that the number of state employee positions funded has fallen since 2011. Look:</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpMRfdQXIYF6FPsD-3r_YT_1RW9QY5mRRA3Wrg_c_I5ecU9UczA9SaXMu50qxeRt40U8mcvefgTdBuWTDOINlXawk-woXUX66F75-J7SMfD0skMieZ-BRQY54e5jZZU6tP7E-DMr2vOVPC/s1600/Screen+Shot+2017-10-18+at+11.17.21+AM.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="323" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpMRfdQXIYF6FPsD-3r_YT_1RW9QY5mRRA3Wrg_c_I5ecU9UczA9SaXMu50qxeRt40U8mcvefgTdBuWTDOINlXawk-woXUX66F75-J7SMfD0skMieZ-BRQY54e5jZZU6tP7E-DMr2vOVPC/s640/Screen+Shot+2017-10-18+at+11.17.21+AM.png" width="640" /></a><span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 11px; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">The real irony in all this Republican whining about a “spending problem” is that if we have one, it is the product of budgets created by Republican controlled legislatures ever since Steve Bullock moved into the governor’s office.**** If we are spending money on things we don’t need or can’t afford, or if there are too many people on the public payroll (and I don’t think any of that is the case) then the Republicans have only themselves to blame. But instead of blaming themselves they’re dumping the whole mess on Steve Bullock’s desk and shouting over their shoulders as they walk out of the room, “Here, governor, fix this because we sure as hell won’t!”</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">* All three charts in this post are from a report prepared by the Legislative Fiscal Division at the Montana Legislature.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">** It may be right, of course. Given the growth of income inequality, it is true that a majority of Montana families experience below average growth in income. A disproportionate share of all income growth is captured by a relatively small segment of the population.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">*** The impact on average earnings of the shift away from natural resource employment is really pretty small (shameless plug: see <i>Post Cowboy Economics</i>, by Tom Power and yours truly) and the Republican writers can only bizarrely defend their claim that the shift has crimped tax collections by citing budget director Dan Villa’s observation that “Timber mills paid property taxes. Hospitals do not.” Of course that has nothing to do with wages: hospitals pay lower property taxes because they are largely tax exempt. And in 2016, hospital pay per job was 143 percent of average pay per job across all industries, making them a pretty poor example of “lower-paying service and tourism jobs.”</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; min-height: 12px; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;"><span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: initial;">****Please note: The budget passed by the 2017 legislature contains more spending than the governor asked at the start of the session.</span> </span></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-41352580512181977742017-07-31T12:49:00.000-06:002017-07-31T12:49:34.016-06:00Lean Times<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">No less a news outlet than the Washington Times is <a href="http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/30/montana-house-speaker-defends-pending-state-budget/">reporting today</a> that <span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none;">House Speaker Austin Knudsen</span>, whose economic ideology fits that of the Times to a tee, is defending almost $100 million in looming budget cuts because they are “doing what they are supposed to: Reducing the size of state government in lean economic times.”</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Well, that’s not really quite right. What those cuts are supposed to do is balance the state’s budget at a time when we are collecting less tax revenue than we expected. The Montana constitution says that the budget <i>must</i> be balanced, and as long as the Republican majority obstinately refuses to increase any tax at all, the only way to do that during “lean economic times” is to cut spending.*</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">Of course for the Republicans, if a collateral effect of balancing the budget is to reduce the size of state government, they’re all in. What the hell: in their world, reducing the size of state government is always a good idea, even if it means reducing spending and the provision of vital government services at the moment they’re most needed, i.e. during lean economic times. It’s a notion that flies in the face of the common sense observation that government spending ought to be counter-cyclical; it should grow faster that the economy during downturns, and slower than the economy during booms.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">It’s provisions of Senate Bill 261 from the 2017 session that are creating the mess we are currently contending with. In the long run, the bill establishes a reserve fund that will stabilize the budget by allowing a modest decoupling of spending and taxes; when that happens, it will be a good thing. We won’t be forced to reduce the size of government during lean economic times.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">But the way SB 261’s written, spending in the immediate future - over the next biennium - is very sensitive to the amount of revenue we collected last fiscal year. I’ll spare you the grizzly details; but suffice it to say that the cuts that are triggered will severely impact agencies serving the elderly and the disabled, the university system, and the schools. That may gratify the Speaker by reducing the size of state government, but it’s really not what we want to be doing.</span></div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal; min-height: 14px;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;"></span><br /></div>
<br />
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-stroke-width: initial; font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: normal;">
<span style="font-kerning: none;">*During the 2017 session there were bills to increase taxes on tobacco products, alcohol, the profits that corporations doing business in Montana hide in tax havens and very high individual incomes. Needless to say, not one of those bills passed.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-kerning: none;"><br /></span></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-51261567170507677472017-07-30T15:03:00.000-06:002017-07-30T16:42:34.785-06:00Sticking with the Paris Accords<div class="BodyA">
In the wake of Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the
Paris climate accords, a bunch of governors, mayors and business executives
have announced their intention to stick with the Paris commitments. There has
also been active organization in support of the agreement among state
legislators (you can read the details at the National Caucus of Environmental
Legislators <a href="http://ncel.net/climate-action/">website</a>); in Montana,
a group of us sent the letter below to Governor Bullock, urging him to join in
the effort.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<div class="BodyA">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Dear Governor Bullock:<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">As legislators who are profoundly concerned about the
threat of climate change, we applaud your recent statements regarding the
danger to the people of Montana posed by President Trump’s decision to withdraw
the United States from the Paris climate accords. Like you, we recognize that
climate change can only be arrested through international collective action
that includes the committed participation of the United States. In withdrawing from
the Paris accords, the President has abandoned that commitment, and, sadly,
American global leadership in general. While it is true that the remaining
signatories have pledged to forge ahead, we believe that the accords have been
seriously destabilized, and the potential consequences of that destabilization,
for Montana and indeed the whole world, are extraordinarily serious. <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">But all is not lost. Numerous governors, state
legislatures, mayors and businesses have stated their intention to honor the United
States’ Paris commitments despite the President’s decision to withdraw them. We
believe that these actions are essential to sustaining the Paris agreements
until the Federal government is once again able to conduct itself in a
responsible manner, and we believe that Montana should join in that effort. <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Specifically, we believe that Montana, under your
direction, should commit itself to firm, quantitative, and verifiable
reductions in statewide greenhouse gas emissions.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">We recognize that technically, economically and
politically such a commitment will be very challenging, but we are confident
that it is within the resources of your office to initiate the analysis and
planning required to put emissions reduction efforts in place, and we stand
ready to work with you as we move forward. We believe that the efforts of
Governor Schweitzer’s Climate Change Advisory Commission in 2008 and of the Department
of Environmental Quality in 2014 (in response to the EPA’s Clean Power Plan)
provide useful models of how to proceed as well as an important existing cache
of information regarding emissions reduction strategies.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Regardless of how they are undertaken, we believe that
the following are the minimum necessary steps for developing and implementing
an emissions reductions plan:<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-hansi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";">1.<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Development of an emissions inventory
and monitoring system capable of verifying that target reductions are being
met.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-hansi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";">2.<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Identification of effective strategies
for reducing emissions. Many of these - particularly those associated with
electrical generation, such as improved efficiency, replacement of fossil fuels
with renewables, carbon capture and storage, and so forth - are already well
known. Others, especially those related to the transportation and industrial
sectors, less so.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-hansi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";">3.<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Determination of the cost of various
strategies and of the least cost combination of strategies capable of producing
targeted emissions reductions.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-hansi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";">4.<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Analysis of the policy measures and,
in particular, the legislation required to implement the least costly
combination of strategies. This analysis should include market-based policies
such as carbon taxes, offsets and bubbles, cap and trade, interstate and
intraregional emissions trading, and the like.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA" style="margin-left: .25in; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial; mso-hansi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";">5.<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Because capping emissions will
inevitably lead to a transformation in the way energy is produced and
transportation is managed, an assessment of the impacts of the policy on adversely
affected communities, industries, occupations and income groups is essential,
as well as the identification of measures needed to ameliorate those impacts.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">We understand that mandating and achieving meaningful
reductions in the state’s greenhouse gas emissions is going to be no easy feat.
We understand as well the compelling logic of doing nothing, avoiding the costs
of action, and benefiting from the efforts of others. But that logic,
compelling as it might be, is myopic. If it applies in Montana, it applies with
equal force in California and Hawaii and China and France, and ultimately leads
to paralysis. To see beyond that wrongheaded logic requires vision, creativity,
and the courage to risk self-sacrifice. In a word, it requires leadership. In
our view, to the grave peril of the nation and the world, President Trump does
not understand and refuses to exercise the leadership required of him. And so
we ask you to step forward, and pledge to support you in this effort.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA" style="line-height: 120%; margin-bottom: 10.0pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="BodyA" style="margin-bottom: 10.0pt;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Rep. Kim Abbott <br />
Rep. Laurie Bishop <br />
</span></i><i><span lang="PT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: PT;">Sen. Dick Barrett
<br />
Rep. Bryce Bennett <br />
Rep. Zach Brown <br />
</span></i><i><span lang="IT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: IT;">Rep. Willis Curdy
<br />
Rep. Amanda Curtis </span></i><i><span lang="PT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: PT;"><br />
</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Rep.
Mary Ann Dunwell </span></i><i><span lang="PT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: PT;"><br />
Rep. Janet Ellis <br />
Sen. Tom Facey <br />
Rep. Dave Fern <br />
Rep. John Fleming <br />
Rep. Mofle Funk <br />
</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Sen.
Jen Gross <br />
Rep. Jim Hamilton </span></i><i><span lang="PT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: PT;"><br />
</span></i><i><span lang="NL" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: NL;">Rep. Ellie
Boldman Hill </span></i><i><span lang="PT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: PT;"><br />
Rep. Denise Hayman <br />
</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Sen</span></i><i><span lang="DE" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: DE;">. Margie MacDonald </span></i><i><span lang="PT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: PT;"><br />
Sen. Sue Malek <br />
Rep. Shane Morigeau <br />
Rep. Andrea Olsen <br />
Sen. Mike Phillips <br />
Sen. JP Pomnichowski <br />
</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Rep.
Marilyn Ryan </span></i><i><span lang="PT" style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-ansi-language: PT;"><br />
Sen. Diane Sands <br />
Rep. Kathy Swanson <br />
Sen. Cynthia Wolken <br />
</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Rep.
Tom Woods </span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: Arial;"><o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="BodyA">
</div>
<div class="BodyA" style="margin-bottom: 10.0pt;">
<i><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">City Commissioner Andres Hallway,
Helena <br />
City Commissioner Rob Farris-Olsen, Helena <br />
Mayor Bob Kelly, Great Falls <br />
Mayor Carson Taylor, Bozeman <br />
County Commissioner Jean Curtiss, Missoula <br />
County Commissioner Nicole Rowley, Missoula <br />
County Commissioner Dave Strohmaier, Missoula <o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
</div>
<div class="BodyA">
<div class="BodyA" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: 10.0pt;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
</div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-68690362718797353572017-04-20T14:35:00.000-06:002017-04-20T17:02:20.409-06:00Swiss Cheese<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Not for the first time, Fred Thomas
is about to make my head explode.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
In a <a href="http://ypradio.org/post/capitol-connections-final-days-negotiations">YPR interview</a> with
Chuck Johnson yesterday, Thomas* suggested that in order to wind up the current legislative session, he (and his caucus, one presumes) need to strike a deal with Governor
Steve Bullock. The way it’s supposed to work, the Republicans will throw their
support behind an infrastructure bonding bill - which Bullock really wants - if the Governor will back a bunch of selective
tax cuts – which the Republicans really want. Of course it’s not just
Republican legislators who like these tax cuts. The beneficiaries –
international corporations who shield their Montana profits from taxation, high
income venture capitalists, telecommunications companies, high rollers who promise
to build data centers, companies that are <i>required</i>
(oh, the outrage of it!) to install pollution control equipment – also think they
are pretty peachy.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
What I don’t get is how Thomas
can keep a straight face when he proposes a deal like this and then claim, in
the same breath, to be fiscally responsible. What we’re gonna do, apparently,
is swallow hard and borrow a bunch of money, and then take a big bite out of the
future revenue stream we need to pay the money back! How does that compute? And
if we are going to be building infrastructure with the money we borrow, why in
God’s green earth shouldn’t all these folks agitating for tax breaks help pay
for it? <br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Thomas, bred-in-the-bone supply-sider
that he is, will no doubt tell you that these tax cuts will more than pay for
themselves! That's because if we offer a tidy "incentive" to these footloose outfits, they swear they'll come to Montana. And if we don't, they’ll go
somewhere else. The way Thomas puts it, we need to make Montana “competitive”
so they’ll set up shop here. And we know that because they tell us so, over and
over again.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
When, if ever, will we learn that
these guys dangle the same bag of gold in front of the noses of every state
legislature in the country? When, if ever, will we learn than when the race to
the bottom is finished, we’ll end up with a tax system with more holes in it
than a block of Swiss cheese, and nothing to show for it?<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
When, if ever, will we learn that
if these guys do end up in Montana, they’ll be demanding not just
infrastructure, but police and fire protection and an educated work force and
freedom from environmental regulation and subsidized air fares and even more tax cuts?<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
When, if ever, will we realize that
we are dealing with people that are telling us, in so many words, that they
are willing to do business in Montana only if they don’t have to pay the same
taxes the rest of us poor schmucks do?<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
When, if ever, will we realize
that good tax policy means defending the interests of all the people and
businesses that are already here and committed to Montana, who get up every
day, send their kids to school, go to work and pay their taxes without
complaint and without looking for a handout?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
* For those of you not familiar
with Treasure State politics, Thomas is the Republican majority leader in the
Montana Senate. <o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-71766193944416384572017-03-31T14:30:00.000-06:002017-03-31T15:33:32.317-06:00Opportunity Knocks<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
On Monday, when we took up Sen.
Jennifer Fielder’s bill creating a <i>constitutional</i>
<i>right</i> to fish, hunt and trap, I had
that familiar, sinking feeling that the Montana Senate had once again given up
on logic for the day.*<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
The idea is lunatic enough as it
is – after all, fishing, hunting and trapping are simply pastimes enjoyed by a
minority of the population and in that sense no more worthy of constitutional
protection than canoeing or skiing or drinking beer or crocheting or … well,
you get the idea. But then Sen. Fred
Thomas doubled down on this foolishness by rising to his feet, voice trembling
with righteous indignation, to insist that we had to pass this bill because our
“rights are under attack.” I don’t know, but it seems to me that if the bill
creates rights that we don’t currently have, it’s hard to see how they’re
already under attack.** <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
What Fielder and her pals were
doing here was protecting their own interests by claiming a right that doesn’t really
exist. They want access to public lands, resources and wildlife for their own
benefit, and they resent the fact that, particularly in the case of trapping,
there are other Montanans who dispute how those lands should be used and how
that wildlife should be treated. What better way is there to prevail in that
kind of dispute than to claim some imaginary right to do whatever you want, and
attack your opponents for suppressing that right? <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
But Fielder was in something of a
quandary when she proposed to create a right and in the same breath assert she
already had it. She tried to get out of the mess by claiming that all she was
doing was “clarifying” what the voters intended when they added the hunting and
fishing provision to the Montana constitution in 2004. You can read that
provision (<a href="http://barrettforsd47.blogspot.com/2017/02/unconditional-nonsense.html">Article
IX,Section 7</a>) for yourself, but since all it says is that the <i>opportunity</i> to harvest fish and game is
to be forever preserved, you’ll probably be hard pressed to conclude that –
oops! – what we really meant was that there’s a <i>right</i> to trap.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Sen. Jed Hinkle, by the way, made
a big deal out of that <i>opportunity</i>
language. Why, he claimed, we don’t even know what the term means. It can’t be
found in a legal dictionary! So when we protected the <i>opportunity</i> to hunt and fish, Hinkle figures, we must have really
meant the <i>right</i> to hunt and fish and
trap. This linguistic legerdemain might have been a little more plausible if,
in his closing comments, Hinkle hadn’t shot himself in the foot by noting that
with this bill we had – wait for it – a “great opportunity” to define that most
obscure of words: opportunity!<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Fielder’s bill to amend the
Constitution got out of the Senate with 30 votes aye (all Republican) and 20
votes no (18 Democrats and 2 Republicans).**
It takes the aye votes of 100 legislators to put a
constitutional amendment on the ballot, so the bill needs 70 votes in the
House to move forward, and that probably ain’t going to happen. But you might
just give your representative a little nudge to make sure it doesn’t. Opportunity knocks.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
*You can listen to the whole
sorry debate <a href="http://montanalegislature.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?clip_id=23273&meta_id=220625">here</a>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
**Technically, <a href="http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2017/billhtml/SB0236.htm">the bill</a> doesn’t
actually create a right to fish, hunt and trap. Rather, it asks the voters to put that right into the Montana constitution.<br />
<br />
***You can check out how your senator
voted <a href="http://laws.leg.mt.gov/legprd/LAW0211W$BLAC.VoteTabulation?P_VOTE_SEQ=S1118&P_SESS=20171">here</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-907428604741938122017-03-12T14:04:00.000-06:002017-08-09T23:35:21.947-06:00A Mindless Syllogism<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
It seems like every time I’ve
turned on the television recently, or clicked on an on-line link, I’ve been
subjected to House Speaker Austin Knudsen’s repeated video entreaties to call
Sen. Tester and insist that he confirm Neil Gorsuch’s appointment to the Supreme Court. Unless you’ve been in a coma or unplugged from the internet, you too have
probably seen the Knudsen video. But in case you haven’t, here it is:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/415DKgxRm0E/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/415DKgxRm0E?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Now, admittedly – and this is
particularly true in the era of Donald Trump – when it comes to political advertising,
tweeting and the like, we can’t expect much in the way of logic or respect for the
facts. But I figure that if Knudsen is going to beat us on the head with the
same message over and over again, which presumably means he thinks he’s got
something worthwhile to say, he’s fair game for a little critical deconstruction.
Here then, verbatim, is Knudsen’s pitch:<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i>I’m Montana House Speaker Austin Knudsen. I know what it’s like to
fight against Washington’s War on the West.
That’s why we need Judge Gorsuch on the Supreme Court. A judge who will
interpret the law, not make the law. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i>The Senate must confirm the President’s nominee. Senator Daines is
supporting Judge Gorsuch, but Senator Tester, what’s he waiting for? Call
Senator Tester and tell him it’s time to confirm Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme
Court.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Nobody, not even Knudsen himself,
could possibly regard this statement, taken at face value, as anything other
than absurd<i>. </i>Whether or not we <i>need</i> Judge Gorsuch is an open question,
but surely the answer to it doesn’t depend on what Austin Knudsen does or doesn’t
know. If Knudsen had stayed home in Culbertson tending to his law practice and had
never become familiar with “Washington’s War on the West,” would we not need
Judge Gorsuch? Is that what he's telling us?<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Well of course not. He’s offering
us this ridiculous non-sequitur because as lame as it is, it’s better that the mindless
syllogism it’s attempting to cover for. That, apparently, goes something like
this.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i>There is some undefined thing called Washington’s War on the West which
is inimical to our (read Tester’s constituents’) interests.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i>There are laws that would protect these interests from Washington's assault if they were properly
upheld.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i>These laws will be upheld if the Supreme Court is populated by justices
who “interpret the law, not make the law.” <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Judge Gorsuch will be such a justice.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i>Ergo, Sen. Tester should support the confirmation of Judge Gorsuch.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
While the logic in this line of
reasoning makes sense, the problem is with the premises, all of which lie
somewhere between being at best arguable and at worst figments of Knudsen’s fevered imagination. So really, it's best not to lay out the argument at all. Just stick to the illogical soundbites.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
When it comes to Knudsen’s
question – what is Sen. Tester waiting for? – the answer is really pretty
simple. As Knudsen says, senators “must confirm the President’s nominee.”
Presumably, in doing that, we would like them to know who they are dealing with.
Tester recognizes that there is a lot more involved in confirming Gorsuch than
discovering his views on the War on the West, whatever that may be. There’s
corporate involvement in elections, clean air and clean water, women’s health
care, and the sovereignty of tribal nations, for example. Here’s a link to Tester talking
about his <a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/video/sen-tester-i-m-open-to-voting-to-approve-gorsuch-for-supreme-court-seat-871258179560">meeting with Gorsuch</a> on those very issues.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p><br />
So, Speaker Knudsen, what’s
delaying Sen. Tester is the need to act with due diligence, and we should all
be glad that’s true. It’s something you might recommend to Sen. Daines, who
apparently wouldn’t recognize it if it slapped him upside the head. He
certainly didn’t think it was necessary as long as the nomination came from
Donald Trump, and when Barak Obama nominated Merrick Garland, he refused to
even consider it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-12762130293782329852017-02-26T20:17:00.000-07:002017-02-27T11:47:30.529-07:00A Brutal Disgrace<div class="MsoNormal">
Seven years ago, when the Supreme Court handed down its
opinion in <i>Baxter</i>, it freed Montana physicians from the fear of criminal
conviction for providing aid in dying to the terminally ill. Dying patients
could request a life ending medication that would allow them to end suffering,
to avoid the loss of autonomy that the treatment of terminal illness often
brings in its wake, and to have a small measure of control over when and where
and with whom to spend their final hours. The court said that in acceding to
these requests from adult, terminally ill and mentally competent patients,
doctors were clearly acting with their patients’ consent, and accordingly would
have an affirmative defense if they were ever charged with a crime.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p>If that all sounds a bit legalistic, read the <a href="http://law.justia.com/cases/montana/supreme-court/2009/50c59956-3100-468d-b397-4ab38f6eda4d.html">decision</a>,
because the court also made clear that in providing aid in dying, doctors would
be acting in harmony with the rights of the terminally ill, established in law,
to be autonomous, to make decisions about their own treatment, and to refuse
treatment - even food or water - to hasten their own deaths. Providing aid in
dying would recognize these rights and be an act of compassion and respect.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But now Rep.Brad Tschida wants to make it an act of murder.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
House Bill 536, which Tschida brought to the House Judiciary
Committee last Friday, is brutal in its simplicity and intent. Under the bill,
physicians who respond to a request from their patients for aid in dying will
no longer be protected. No matter how heartfelt the request, no matter how
badly the patient is suffering, no matter how immanent death is, no matter how
clear-headedly the patient is acting – no matter any of this, a doctor who
honors a request for aid in dying can be charged with murder. The clear desires
of the dying patient will be to no avail.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If there is anything more outrageous than this bill itself,
it is the hearing it was accorded in the House Judiciary Committee. Because
bills like this have been heard in the past, much of the testimony was
familiar. Proponents claimed, as they have done over and over again, that
providing aid in dying is susceptible to all sorts of terrible abuses, while
producing not the slightest shred of evidence that these abuses have ever occurred
anywhere, let alone in Montana. Opponents pled for their autonomy and liberty
to be respected and told stories of how spouses, or children, or parents died at
home, peacefully, and surrounded by family.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
All that was to be expected. But what was not to be expected was
the careless and callous way in which the hearing was conducted. Faced with a
bill of significant social, legal and moral consequence, the committee
chairman, Rep. Alan Doane, would allow only half an hour of testimony - fifteen
minutes per side. After that time was up, he cut off testimony from opponents
who had traveled across the state to testify. When members of the committee
tried to elicit testimony from the opponents, he refused to recognize further
committee questions.<br />
<br />
I have been in a lot of hearings on a lot of bills, but I
have never seen a chairman act as abusively and recklessly as Doane did in the
hearing on this bill. His performance was a gross disservice to the public, to
his colleagues in the House, and to the duty to govern with intelligence and
compassion. You can watch video of this entire sorry episode <a href="http://montanalegislature.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=21&clip_id=22310">here</a>.<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
HB 536 is ugly legislation, and its hearing was an utter
disgrace. It is unworthy of the Montana legislature and the people of this
state.<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-71968864246139263502017-02-17T08:40:00.000-07:002017-02-17T08:40:54.418-07:00Very, Very Unfair<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
There was a lot of head shaking
going on in the Senate Energy Committee recently at the very thought of taxing pollution
control and carbon sequestration equipment. How could it possibly be right to
impose the business equipment tax on that stuff? After all, companies only install
it because the government forces them to, and having it around certainly doesn’t
help them make money and stay in business. As Donald Trump would put it, "Very, very unfair!" Right? <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Well no, not really. In the
interests of both efficiency and fairness, we usually expect any firm that
wants to stay in business to cover its costs.
That includes the environmental costs it imposes on the public, which
are just as real and <i>economic</i> as
wages, utility bills, rent, bank charges, raw material purchases and other costs
incurred in markets. How we get firms to internalize (that is, actually pay for)
environmental costs varies from case to case. Sometimes we actually price pollution
(think carbon tax), but more often we simply cap pollution levels or require
the use of pollution control equipment.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
So having mandated pollution
control equipment on hand does help firms stay in business and make money
because it reduces the environmental damage they would be financially
responsible for if they didn’t have it. If they complain that pollution control
equipment is not a valuable and productive asset, these companies are
implicitly claiming that were it not for government, they would have the right
to wreak havoc on the environment with no financial consequences. <br /><br />And if they claim that being made
financially responsible for the environmental damage they might do will drive
them out of business, so be it. That simply means that whatever they’re
producing isn’t worth what it costs to produce it. By the cold logic of the market,
they are just too inefficient to keep the doors open.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-13049080985540933812017-02-03T12:35:00.000-07:002017-02-03T12:35:47.130-07:00Unconditional Nonsense<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
I’ve been getting a small flood
of constituent emails in the past couple of days, all of which read as follows:<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="background: white; color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">Dear
Senator Richard Barrett:</span><o:p></o:p></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><br />
<span style="background: white;"><span style="text-align: start;">As your constituent, I respectfully urge you to
support House Bill 262 when it comes up for a vote.</span><o:p></o:p></span></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<i><span style="color: #222222; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;"><br />
<span style="background: white;"><span style="text-align: start;">This important legislation would allow any
law-abiding individual who can legally possess a firearm to carry a handgun for
self-defense in Montana without having to obtain a permit to do so. This
bill recognizes a law-abiding adult's unconditional Right to Keep and Bear Arms
for self-defense in the manner he or she chooses.</span></span><br style="text-align: start;" />
<br style="text-align: start;" />
<span style="background: white;"><span style="text-align: start;">Again, as your constituent, I urge you to support
House Bill 262.</span></span></span></i><br /><br />Now I’m always happy to hear from
constituents, and I’m willing to consider, however briefly, whether or not it’s
a good idea to let people walk around carrying a concealed handgun without a
permit. But can we please, please dispense
with the absurd claim that anyone has an “unconditional Right to Keep and Bear Arms for self defense in the manner he or she chooses.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Other than in the febrile imagination
of the NRA or the Montana Shooting Sports Association, no such unconditional right
exists. It’s not in the Montana Constitution, the common law, the Bible, the
Quran or anywhere else. It’s not even in the Second Amendment to the US
Constitution, which the Supreme Court has repeatedly said does not prohibit
government from conditioning gun rights, by limiting who can have guns, what
kind of guns they can have, and where they can take them.<br /><br />Now I get the rhetoric here. When
you want something but can’t make a compelling case for why you should have it,
it’s always a good idea to claim it’s yours by right. After all, who wants to
take anyone’s rights away? But before you make the claim, you really ought to
check and make sure the “right” that’s being taken was ever there in the first
place.<br /><br />It’s not unusual to get a bunch
of identically worded emails, but it obviously means that some organization or
other has convinced its members to fire off some canned text. That’s okay, if
not terribly effective. I don’t know who’s behind this particular email, although
it isn’t hard to guess. To whoever it is, I’d say this: please have a little
respect for your members. Don’t set them up to fail by having them express
opinions that are patently – unconditionally - ludicrous. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-1230688025627422662017-01-20T12:34:00.000-07:002017-01-20T12:34:24.365-07:00Schooled by a SchoolgirlLast week, when I presented a bill to the Judiciary Committee providing for primary enforcement of the state's seat belt law, Isabelle Earl, who's 15, showed up to testify.<br />
<br />
It's important to know something about the hearing room, the august former Supreme Court chambers in the Capitol. The committee sits on elevated benches. The floor is carpeted. There are murals on the ceiling and ornate brass lamps on the wall. In short, a solemn setting which is bound to faze a bit just about anybody who shows up to testify.<br />
<br />
But Isabelle did just fine. She spoke in a clear eyed, articulate and moving way about her cousin, Lauryn Goldhawn, who died earlier this year when the car she was riding in, unrestrained, crashed outside of Fairfield. She pleaded with the committee to pass the bill in the hope that other kids like Lauryn wouldn't lose their lives. She did a great job.<br />
<br />
But when it came time for questions from the committee, Sen. Nels Swandal, a former district court judge, had a question for Isabelle. To start with, he didn't remember her name, so he asked for the "young lady in pink" to come to the microphone. And then he asked her, tendentiously, why she thought government should require citizens to do something that's in their own best interests. He didn't insist or expect her to answer the question, in essence instructing her to run along and think about it some more. It was a gratuitous performance and a violation of the unwritten rules of decorum legislators are supposed to follow in dealing with the public.<br />
<br />
But Isabelle took it in stride. She did go back and think about Sen. Swandal's question and she came up with an answer. Here it is:<br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><i>Dear Senator Swandal,</i></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span id="m_-7403351978830904611gmail-docs-internal-guid-53ea686b-ba57-1460-8554-187670fc77e0"><i><br /></i></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> On Thursday, January 12th, I made the decision to testify in front of you and your committee members on behalf of Senate Bill 9. I was extremely nervous to speak in front of people with such power and knowledge, but I did it because I thought that if my voice was heard, it might make a difference and people’s lives may be saved. I understand you Tabled this bill, but what I have to say in response to your question is still important. </span></i></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">After the proponents and opponents spoke, you called me back up to the podium. You asked me, “Why do we need to pass a law to make you do something that is our own best interest?” </span></i></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I see that you have just started your second term as a Senator, so I am sure you remember your Oath of Office. You swore to support and uphold the Constitution of the United States as well as the State of Montana. In Article 2 Section 3 of Montana’s Constitution, it states:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “</span><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">All persons are born free and have certain inalienable rights. They include the right to a clean and healthful environment and the rights of pursuing life's basic necessities, enjoying and defending their lives and liberties, acquiring, possessing and protecting property,</span><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-weight: 700; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> and seeking their safety</span><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, health and happiness in all lawful ways. In enjoying these rights, all persons recognize </span><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-weight: 700; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">corresponding responsibilities</span><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.”</span></i></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-indent: 36pt;">
<i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The phrase </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-weight: 700; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“corresponding responsibilities</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">” means that people's decisions affect people other than just themselves. We need laws to prevent chaos. If everybody acted on their own wants and wishes, their actions would undoubtedly infringe upon others’ rights. For example, everyone understands littering is not in our best interest, yet we created laws against this act because it infringes upon other’s rights to a </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">clean and healthful environment.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> There are many other laws that reinforce our best interest, because even though social responsibility may seem intuitively obvious to some, laws are necessary to clarify it for others. (i.e. shoplifting, trespassing, rape, murder, etc.)</span></i></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-indent: 36pt;">
<i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It ultimately is up to our Legislature to pass laws to protect the people of Montana. Wearing a seatbelt is important to protecting the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-weight: 700; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">safety</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> of Montanans as was clearly defined by the overwhelming statistics shared by several of the many proponents who spoke in favor of SB9. If you are in an accident, and not wearing your seatbelt, you can endanger the </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-weight: 700; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">safety</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> of the passengers in your car, anyone in a vehicle around you, the responding emergency crews and healthcare workers. The decision to buckle up is not a decision to be taken lightly. </span></i></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-indent: 36pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><i>The point of this law is not to strip someone of their rights, as was claimed by the mere three opponents to this bill. First of all, wearing your seat belt is already the law. In its current capacity, however, we have restricted police officer’s ability to enforce it effectively. People have “lost the right” to NOT wear their seatbelt a long time ago. I believe the opponents forgot this during their testimony, especially when Mr. French admitted to only wearing his seatbelt a portion of his three hour drive to Helena that day. </i></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The fact that this law did not pass completely shocked me. You heard overwhelming testimony from a multitude of experts in their respective fields and on this subject, with minimal meaningful opposition, yet, your committee overwhelmingly made the decision to Table. Not only does a primary seatbelt law save lives, it saves our state and its taxpayers’ money. (Utah’s statistics prove this to be true, as stated in one of SB9’s proponent’s testimony.) Also, as the representative from the trucking industry stated, we are infringing upon their ability to do business in Montana, because of their increased insurance costs. Therefore, they are incentivized to avoid doing business in our state. </span></i></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-indent: 36pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><i>Senator Swandal, just the fact that lives could be saved without financial costs should be convincing enough to pass this law. I’ve lost someone close to me, and I know you understand how hard that can be. This law can help prevent families from these types of tragedies. SB9 (Lauryn’s Law) is what this state needs. Please reconsider and take this bill off the table. </i></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<i><br /></i></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><i>Sincerely, </i></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><i>Isabelle Earl</i></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The young lady in the pink.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: 14.6667px; font-variant-numeric: normal; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span></i></div>
<br />
<br />Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-25915732126771366622016-10-21T20:21:00.000-06:002016-10-22T10:01:28.662-06:00Dark, Dark Money<div class="MsoNormal">
Talk about dark money! What on earth are the Missoula County
Republicans up to?<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I was looking over my opponent’s latest campaign finance
report recently and saw she reported that back in June, the Missoula County
Republican Central Committee donated $1,400 to her campaign. That’s a pretty
good chunk of cash, and got me wondering whether other Republican candidates
had enjoyed the same largesse. And it turns out they did: according to their
various individual fillings, Republican candidates in the county had received a
total of $7,700 from their central committee.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Now that’s an even bigger chunk of cash channeled into
campaigns, and it would be nice to know where it came from. And tracking that down
shouldn’t be hard to do, because just like candidates, political party
committees are supposed to file reports with the Commissioner of Political
Practices detailing where they got their money and how they spent it. You can
find that information on the Commissioner’s <a href="https://camptrackext.mt.gov/CampaignTracker/dashboard">website</a>. But
here’s what the Missoula County Republican Central Committee's reports to the
Commissioner tell us:<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Essentially nothing.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The Missoula County Republicans have not filed a report
since July 27, which means they have failed to account for their activity in August and September, as required by law.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Since the beginning of the year, when they started out with
zero in the bank, they report that they have had no expenditures – not one
penny – even though the candidates claim they got that total of $7,700.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to their last report, they have $20,316.19 in the
bank, all of which they say they took in during January and February. But
again, contrary to the law, they provide absolutely zero information about
where that money came from.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So there is $7,700 being spent by Republican candidates in
Missoula county that comes from unknown sources. It may be the result of
incompetence or negligence rather than anything more nefarious, but any way you
slice it, that money’s about as dark as it can get.<br />
<br />
By the way, it may look like the Republican candidates are
blameless in all this – after all, they can’t force the central committee to
file accurate and timely financial reports – but it’s not that simple. Because guess what? It turns out that two of
the candidates getting donations – Adam Hertz and Sashin Hume - are <a href="http://missoularepublicans.org/executive-committee/">executive officers</a>
of the Missoula County Republican Central Committee!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-62830897782636115702016-08-25T15:31:00.000-06:002016-08-25T15:31:55.610-06:00Sad<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Last April I <a href="http://barrettforsd47.blogspot.com/2016/04/struggling-to-survive-revolution.html">posted</a>
that while there were certain superficial similarities between Greg Gianforte
and Donald Trump, there were also big differences: Gianforte, while not much of
an original thinker, was a civil guy and a straight shooter. I didn’t think he
would stoop to the abuse, fear mongering, narcissism and falsehoods that come so
naturally to Trump. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Well, I spoke too soon.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Last week the Gianforte campaign
mailed out fliers attacking Steve Bullock for “bringing Syrian refugees into
Montana” and assuring us that if he is elected, Gianforte would “BAN refugees
from countries known to harbor terrorists like Iran and Syria.” It was pure
Trump, filled with frightening but deceptive imagery, misstatements of fact,
and absurd boasts about what Gianforte would and could do to make us all safe.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy9z-AguV4mdJrEu0GQHfsDV24SD3ajioPXUkoGFlgCvwvuzDK9GZb3DvtLDyTBJSBHR2o_tTUVWpFJmA_TPkxxFw75NG-PNDy2g4lZCh64T3ituj9ELL3pNMndwBbBceTaquxiVA6MU26/s1600/gianfortecard.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="216" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy9z-AguV4mdJrEu0GQHfsDV24SD3ajioPXUkoGFlgCvwvuzDK9GZb3DvtLDyTBJSBHR2o_tTUVWpFJmA_TPkxxFw75NG-PNDy2g4lZCh64T3ituj9ELL3pNMndwBbBceTaquxiVA6MU26/s320/gianfortecard.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br />Like Trump, Gianforte depicts
Syrian refugees as masked, armed terrorists, not the kids and mothers and
fathers who are being bombed in Aleppo or drowning in the Aegean as they try to
escape. He says his heart goes out to these people and that we have a moral
obligation to help them. No doubt he believes that, but what is he really prepared
to do? It’s a mystery how we can help them if we refuse to provide shelter from
the incessant bombs and rocket fire and bullets and poisonous gas that are
killing them every single day. The name says it all: they desperately need <i>refuge</i>.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxq2fGw0PA97RtFIplKxbI-tLQVFEYv7Yoa6aqlN4W6jEC4PJZEbJi3k6IQ1rOJ2ssl4p5JYh3aVDXZC4lHLsvpSsWCj2iVob2juFSnnsVWHEL7L0m9jUIBE4BzFy5fkpm3sPKK4zBs2hd/s1600/aleppoboy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxq2fGw0PA97RtFIplKxbI-tLQVFEYv7Yoa6aqlN4W6jEC4PJZEbJi3k6IQ1rOJ2ssl4p5JYh3aVDXZC4lHLsvpSsWCj2iVob2juFSnnsVWHEL7L0m9jUIBE4BzFy5fkpm3sPKK4zBs2hd/s320/aleppoboy.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Like Trump, Gianforte exploits
the public’s anxiety by claiming that refugees coming to Montana would be
“unvetted,” when it has been <a href="http://missoulian.com/news/opinion/editorial/missoulian-editorial-gianforte-mailer-unwelcome/article_b4e67936-3b28-5347-9428-305be010dc39.html">reported
over and over again</a> that nobody entering the United States from abroad is
exposed to more comprehensive vetting than refugees are.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Like Trump, Gianforte promises to
do something that he cannot possibly do. He either doesn’t understand or
willfully ignores the fact that as governor of Montana, he cannot ban refugees
from any country, let alone from a list of countries of his own choosing. He
cannot stop refugees admitted to the United States from settling in Montana
communities. He cannot protect Montanans from violence by preventing refugees
from settling here.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
And like Trump, when his
absurdity and dishonesty are exposed, Gianforte simply denies that he meant
what he clearly said. As the Missoulian <a href="http://missoulian.com/news/local/gianforte-condemns-refugee-resettlement-as-congolese-family-arrives-in-missoula/article_4702563c-16cc-5c56-a25f-1e00acab381b.html">reported
last week</a>, when asked about the flyer, Aaron Flint, Gianforte’s spokesman,
claimed, incredibly, that it wasn’t about refugees, but ISIS. Equating refugees
to ISIS fighters may make Gianforte look resolute in the fight against
terrorism, but it also reveals a frightening willingness to follow,
politically, the path of least resistance.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
I assume that Gianforte’s
decision to take this position was a calculated one. I imagine he’s looking at
polls and finding that the narrow and worn out economic message he has been
purveying up until now just doesn’t have legs, and Trump, playing on the voter’s
insecurities, is doing a lot better. So Gianforte, if he ever did have
reservations about doing politics Trump’s way, has now abandoned them. Anything to get elected. <br /><br />As Trump
himself likes to say, “Sad.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-18433648241741318242016-08-08T20:13:00.000-06:002016-08-08T20:13:50.338-06:00Political Amnesia<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Gubernatorial aspirant Greg
Gianforte, whose only discernable and dubious claim to political fame is that he
will do miracles for Montana’s economy, has a problem. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
It turns out that during most of the
time that Steve Bullock, his opponent, has been governor, the Montana economy
has done pretty well. Employment growth has been robust, the unemployment rate
is well below the rest of the country’s, and the state’s budget has been
managed sensibly. More people than ever have
health insurance. Child welfare has improved significantly. And we
lead the nation in business startups. With Bullock’s record looking like that,
there’s really not much for Gianforte and the Republican Party to hang their
hat on when they say they’re going to make things all better.*<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
So it was no surprise when the <a href="http://billingsgazette.com/news/government-and-politics/gop-lawmakers-slam-bullock-over-revenue-slowdown/article_60efd184-3ead-59d8-a388-b1556bedd08c.html">Billings
Gazette</a> reported last week that a couple of Republican legislative bigwigs –
Sen. Fred Thomas and Rep. Jeff Essmann – seized on the news that the state’s
economy had shrunk over the past six months** to go after Bullock. The downturn
in the economy, which resulted mostly from declines in energy production,
agriculture, and transportation, also means that tax collections are lower than
expected, that the state is spending more than it takes it, and that we’re
going to have less money in the bank than we thought when we close the books
next June. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
And all of this, according to
Thomas and Essmann, is Steve Bullock’s fault.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Yep. According to Thomas, whose
economic theorizing is always inventive (to put it charitably), “over the last
12 years, the environmentalists have occupied the governor’s office and the
chickens are coming home to roost.” Exactly how the “environmentalists” managed
to drive the world price of oil from $100 to $40 a barrel, or produce the cheap
natural gas that’s pushing coal out of the market, or depress grain prices, or
strengthen the dollar and weaken exports, Thomas, if he knows, isn’t saying. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Thomas claims that "if we’re
going to have a natural resource state, we need new leadership at the helm.” But
the new leader in question is obviously Greg Gianforte, whose economic strategy
so far appears to consist exclusively of big tax cuts for big businesses and wealthy
taxpayers. That has even Thomas hemming and hawing a bit: given the current
decline in tax revenue, Thomas tells us that he has cautioned Gianforte that he
needs to show some “flexibility” in implementing tax cuts. The only problem
with that is once he’s been flexible on tax cuts, Gianforte’s got nothing.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Thomas’ take on how the economy
works and what Gianforte can do about it may suffer from incoherence, but when
it comes to budgeting, Essmann appears to suffer from flat out politically
inspired amnesia. According to the Gazette, Essmann “singled out spending based
on ‘overly optimistic’ governor’s office revenue projections” as the reason the
state has a deficit and is running through its cash reserves. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Well, no, not really. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
When the legislature sets the
level of spending and builds a budget, it develops its own revenue estimate; it
doesn’t rely on the governor’s. And in 2015, when the legislative staff and the
governor’s budget guys were coming up with wildly different numbers for
revenue, we set up a special joint subcommittee (full disclosure: I was a
member) of the House and Senate Tax committees to reconcile the differences and
come up with an estimate of our own. We hammered away at it and in the end we –
not the governor - created the revenue number that drove the level of spending.
And the chair of that special joint subcommittee was none other than - wait for it! - Sen. Fred Thomas! It’s
astonishing that Essmann seems to have forgotten how that all happened.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
And if that's not ironic enough
for you, consider that throughout budget deliberations the governor kept
insisting that whatever the revenue estimate, we needed to limit spending
enough to keep $350 million on hand, just in case anything went wrong. Well,
something has gone wrong, we’ve needed the money, and we should be glad we have
it. Bullock was pushing fiscal responsibility. Without it, by now we’d be slashing
programs, laying people off, and making a bad situation worse. And there were a
whole bunch of Republicans running around the Capitol in 2015 saying that
keeping that much cash on hand was a bad thing – that we should give it back, a
la Gianforte, or spend it on infrastructure. <br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Thomas and Essmann should thank
their lucky stars – and Steve Bullock - that that didn’t happen.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
*Well, there’s always Donald
Trump. Oh wait…<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
**To be precise, the decline in
gross state product occurred in the last quarter of 2015 and the first quarter
of 2016. The data are not yet in to tell us what has happened since March of
this year.<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-61414433599921246822016-06-06T14:35:00.000-06:002016-06-16T22:10:38.171-06:00The Twenty Percent Factoid<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
One thing you can count on with
an election around the corner is that Republican politicians will trot out a bunch
of numbers that supposedly demonstrate that growth of government is “out of
control.” And the other thing you can count on when you hear those numbers
bandied about is that they will be a bunch of hooey. Consider, if you will, the
Twenty Percent Factoid.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Back in March, Tom Burnett, a
Bozeman legislator whose antipathy to government is always on display, produced
<a href="http://www.bozemandailychronicle.com/opinions/letters_to_editor/will-government-ever-control-its-spending/article_45ec64e7-93b3-5f52-88ca-36666ca662e7.html">a
calculation in a letter to the Bozeman Chronicle</a> that purported to show
that total state spending had increased by 20.6% between this biennium and the
last. Now that number is big and scary (but not at all consistent with the
facts, which I’ll get to in a moment), and it appeared to go viral among other Republicans, particularly those on the right. Soon enough, <a href="http://www.gregformontana.com/posts/news/406-tax-relief">Greg Gianforte
was claiming</a> that “We have had massive growth in state spending; up over 20
percent in the past three years.” Gianforte assured us that, as part of a
bizarre budget plan based on the fact that <a href="http://barrettforsd47.blogspot.com/2016/04/budgeting-by-area-code.html">our
area code happens to be 406</a>, he was going to bring that growth down to
zero. And hard on the heels of that announcement, the <a href="http://mtstandard.com/politics/gop-rifts-playing-out-in-southwest-montana/article_dea4c7cf-4d81-5a63-96cc-62dc81d16c65.html">Beaverhead
County Republican Central Committee</a> censured Reps. Jeff Welborn and Ray
Shaw, on the grounds that they had voted for bills that “increased state
spending over 20 percent for the biennium,” thereby flunking the Central
Committee’s test of Republican purity. And so the Factoid took on a life of its
own.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Unfortunately, because it should have
died a quiet death months ago.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Since the numbers are not in yet for the current, 2016, fiscal year, it really isn’t possible to compare this
biennium to the last one. But we do know that in fiscal year 2015, the first year of this biennium, total state spending – including Federal dollars appropriated by the
state for programs such as Medicaid – was $5.521 billion, and that back in 2013 it was $5.182 billion.* So over the two year period it increased by 6.5%. Not 20% or
anything like it. And in fiscal year 2012 total spending was $5.092, so over
the three year period between 2012 and 2015, which seems to be what Gianforte’s
talking about, spending rose by 8.4%; again, not even close to 20%.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Okay, so 20% is a monumental
error, but still: Are we looking at excessive growth of government? Is a 6.5% increase
in spending from one biennium to the next a lot or a little? Compared to what? Should
we be worried? Well, enter Art Wittich. Wittich, in a <a href="http://www.belgrade-news.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_f61977ea-17d4-11e6-82d3-73a67de4d4d8.html">letter</a>
to the Belgrade News, doubled down on the Twenty Percent Factoid by claiming
that “During the last three legislative sessions, the state budget increased
three times faster than inflation, population, or the private economy.” Now
that sounds pretty bad, but again, it’s not true.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
It’s not completely clear what
time period Wittich is talking about here, but let’s go back to fiscal year
2010, the last year before the 2011 Legislature’s budget went into effect. From
2010 to 2015, the price level rose 9.7%, population rose 4.2%, the state budget
(including, again, the Federal component) rose 9.1% and total state personal
income, which is as good a measure of the size of the private economy as we
have, rose 26.3%. So over this period, the state budget did not expand “three
times faster” than anything; in fact, it did not even keep up with the growth
of prices or personal income.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
The point Wittich is trying to
make but badly mangling here is that the growth of government spending should
be considered in relation to the prices of the things that government buys, the
number of people it serves, and the amount of income those people earn. The
right way to do that is to compare the growth of real (inflation adjusted) per
capita spending to real (inflation adjusted) per capita personal income. When you do that,
here’s the picture you get:<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhflItp-ow6Z2rny1ks42NYkVt3nHSVWvw2yzyundry1XJncwGokzvcGUlSKQKWT7kt4BZxW9SgFaNeN7Qy1Y_B81p5x9PYcRkcw1lDnOPv5TRnls6HlxLi0edHj4o0hwI0Lt9P-_qi21wr/s1600/spend.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="395" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhflItp-ow6Z2rny1ks42NYkVt3nHSVWvw2yzyundry1XJncwGokzvcGUlSKQKWT7kt4BZxW9SgFaNeN7Qy1Y_B81p5x9PYcRkcw1lDnOPv5TRnls6HlxLi0edHj4o0hwI0Lt9P-_qi21wr/s640/spend.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Over the long haul since 2002,
the economy has grown faster than state spending, rather than the other way
around. There's no "massive" growth going on here. Nothing is out of control. There was a time, during the Great Recession, when state spending grew
rapidly while the economy was contracting. That was because the state spent a
bunch of federal Recovery Act dollars. And that was not a problem: On the
contrary, without that infusion of Federal money, the recession would have been
a lot worse.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
* The issue of expenditure growth
is a perennial favorite, and it produces lots of arguments among legislators,
and Amy Carlson, the Legislative Fiscal Analyst, published a report in 2014
intended to sort the whole mess out. You can access that report <a href="http://search.leg.mt.gov/search?q=Historical+Expenditures&btnG=Search&site=default_collection&client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&filter=p&getfields=*">here</a>.
The numbers I cite in this post were used in the preparation of that report,
and I thank Ms. Carlson and her staff for providing them, updated to 2015, to
me. <o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-87276595268198175422016-05-24T12:33:00.000-06:002016-05-24T13:51:27.998-06:00The Gun Nut<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Donald Trump’s appearance before
the NRA last week was a perfectly predictable olio of bloviation, narcissism,
incivility and misrepresentation. It also revealed, although you probably knew
this already, that the guy is a little nuts.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Trump told the NRA faithful
assembled in Louisville exactly what they wanted to hear: that he was in favor
of more guns everywhere. In schools. In high crime neighborhoods. In Paris night clubs. Everywhere. Gun-free zones
would become a thing of the past.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
The reason for this frenzy is, of
course, “self defense.” For Trump, and for the NRA, we live in a dangerous
world surrounded by people who are out to get us. And the only way we can stop
them in their tracks is to have guns; either, one hopes, to deter attacks in
the first place or, if worse comes to worst, to shoot back. And for Trump,
Hilary Clinton becomes “Heartless Hilary” because she would take people’s guns
away from them and deprive them of their one opportunity to defend themselves.
This is Trump at his adolescent best, lying and name calling in one fell swoop.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Of course it doesn’t bother
Trump in the slightest that there is no evidence that having lots of guns
around will deter gun violence. On the contrary: anyone paying attention knows
that gun ownership is much higher in the United States than it is in other high
income countries. And so is the probability that somebody will shoot you to
death. The extent to which the United States is an outlier in both these regards is
truly stunning. Take a look at this chart.*<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjklhW-2olCXfxIW062NKqQwkpOygGoqNpPrJvgDgYwiv6fGZTTjh5Tca_AK4oPSmF8rTxUP7bmF281StjhtH0xIi67hkP8yOPxyahO9VKUxKvstdmmeZk9nwdatLWGI-276ipN9dWuB7E3/s1600/guns.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjklhW-2olCXfxIW062NKqQwkpOygGoqNpPrJvgDgYwiv6fGZTTjh5Tca_AK4oPSmF8rTxUP7bmF281StjhtH0xIi67hkP8yOPxyahO9VKUxKvstdmmeZk9nwdatLWGI-276ipN9dWuB7E3/s400/guns.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
What you’re seeing here is that in
2007, there were about 15 guns present for every 100 members of the population in
21 high income countries other than the United States. For the US, the
comparable number was 113. In 2010 in those same 21 countries, there were a
little more than .1 gun homicides per 100,000 members of the population; in the
US there were 3.6. The probability of being murdered with a gun in the United
States was <i>25.2 times as high</i> as in
other high income countries. Is it really possible to look at that number and
conclude that having lots and lots of guns around is making us safer?**<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Here’s where the question of
Trump’s sanity rears its ugly head. In the face of overwhelming evidence that
the accumulation of guns has not made us a whit safer in the past, Trump believes that
more guns will make us safer in the future. And that, as a wise man once told
us, albeit in more polite terms, is nuts.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiG_cxarC-U5DfMLT2CNHoh3DrUlsz_Hs6WObZMX2sg1gLgBeK7-XcyIFOiNcUIKPaUDMRLofgzu_n52ztUVNTbnx7RctCSnfrzqUEZM5spOFhY_Ll3rFFxXVGnr1EFiJ_nBIr67rRMpKJG/s1600/einstein.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiG_cxarC-U5DfMLT2CNHoh3DrUlsz_Hs6WObZMX2sg1gLgBeK7-XcyIFOiNcUIKPaUDMRLofgzu_n52ztUVNTbnx7RctCSnfrzqUEZM5spOFhY_Ll3rFFxXVGnr1EFiJ_nBIr67rRMpKJG/s400/einstein.JPG" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
* To prepare this chart I used
data from two sources: the <i>Small Arms
Survey 2007</i> and “Violent Death Rates: The US Compared with Other
High-income OECD Countries, 2010,” in the <i>American
Journal of Medicine</i>, 2015.<br />
<br />
** Don't be thinking that "Well sure, as long as we've got these guns around, we''ll use them when we want to kill somebody. Folks in all those other countries are going to use knives, or poison, or cricket bats or something." It doesn't work that way. Regardless of method, people in other countries murder each other at much lower rates. It's harder to get the job done if you don't have a gun to do it with.<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-11794729688844410302016-05-05T12:57:00.000-06:002016-05-05T13:01:06.288-06:00Paying a Fair Share<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of great mysteries of Greg
Gianforte’s gubernatorial campaign is how on earth he thinks he’s</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
going to get
elected by promising to get rid of the business equipment tax. After all, every
voter in Montana who owns property - a home, a commercial building, farm or ranch
land, a forest tract – pays property taxes. And while we may not be
particularly happy about it when we’re writing the check, most of us recognize
that property taxes go to pay for essential local services like schools, or the
fire and police departments, or the upkeep on parks, or street maintenance. We all know we benefit from those services and
we all have to pay our fair share of the cost of providing them. But now along
comes Gianforte saying, “Hold on a second: It’s all right for all you other
suckers to pick up the tab, but when it comes to big companies with a pile of
business equipment, well, that’s a different matter.”<br />
<br />
Of course Gianforte doesn’t
enunciate his position in quite those terms. On the contrary, he needs to
convince us that we all have a stake in letting those big companies off the
hook. Here, from his <a href="http://www.gregformontana.com/posts/news/406-tax-relief">website</a>, is
the argument, such as it is:<br />
<br />
<i style="color: #093254;">One Montana business person told me that he
invested in a single piece of equipment that created 20 high wage jobs.
His reward? A $300,000 business equipment tax bill over 10 years.
If we want Montana small businesses to grow and succeed, why would we punish
job creators for purchasing more equipment to hire more Montanans?</i><i><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /><br /><span style="color: #093254;"><span style="background-color: white;">The Business Equipment Tax is one of the most regressive taxes
on the books in Montana. It is an annual tax on all the equipment job
creators own. Hotel owners even have to pay it on every fork and spoon
they own—EVERY YEAR! It hits farmers, manufacturers, construction,
oil/gas and high tech hard; basically any business that invests to create jobs
is currently incentivized to invest elsewhere. It chases off investment
and jobs. Most states don’t have a tax like this. Also, because
equipment value is self-reported, the tax is prone to being
under-reported. I am committed to eliminating the business equipment tax
over 4 years as revenue from other sources grows. Any reduction in the
business equipment tax must also provide relief to counties that depend on
these tax revenues today.</span><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></span></i><span style="color: #093254;"><span style="background-color: white;"><i><br /></i></span></span>So there you have it: The reason
we should give large corporations a pass on the taxes all the rest of us have
to pay is that if we don’t, they’ll take their business elsewhere. Republicans
have been saying this kind of thing since Reagan was president, and it’s weird
that Gianforte, who’s supposed to be an outsider who knows how to get things
done, can’t come up with a fresher idea. What’s even weirder is that he doesn’t
seem to realize that in recent legislative sessions the business equipment tax
has already been hacked to bits. Sixty percent of Montana businesses – the small
guys – don’t pay it all. And for the somewhat larger guys, the rate has been
cut in half.* We even have – get this! – the <a href="http://taxfoundation.org/state-tax-climate/montana">sixth best business tax
climate</a> of any state in the country. And so while Gianforte constantly
bemoans the current state of Montana’s economy, his prescription for fixing it
is to do even more of what we have already been doing for the past decade.**</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Gianforte has a prodigious
capacity to overlook evidence and rely instead on a choice anecdote, no matter
how implausible, fabricated or inapt it may be. After all, this is a guy who
ignores everything known about human life expectancy and forms his notions
about when you should be able to retire based on the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/09/greg-gianforte-montana_n_7536568.html">ancient
myth</a> of a 600 year old boat builder. He says he knows that the business
equipment tax is keeping companies out of Montana because somebody at Facebook
told him so, but the narrative is made up out of <a href="http://mtpr.org/post/facebook-contradicts-gianfortes-tax-claim#stream/0">whole
cloth</a>. And now he cites, as evidence of the tax’s destructive impact on
investment, the story of a company that invested and payed the tax!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Gianforte wants you to believe
that when companies invest in new plant and equipment, they invariably create
more jobs. That’s why you should pay property taxes and big companies shouldn’t
have to – one of those new jobs may be yours, or your neighbor's, or your kid's.
He trades here on the misconception that businesses are always “job creators.”
They are, of course, but if hiring people is creating jobs, then laying people
off is destroying jobs, and that happens all the time. The fact is that hundreds of
thousands of people lose jobs every week; here's the chart showing weekly new unemployment claims since 2000:</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0cyKLRTblfFD8MvafA7iRDP9ZlFAjRa8c3UJ4b6gFYxeStWlf-CE-oCnYmohmdZ95F1Vvr_RLltNeUkza4lBo1_ICiWKVKtMYiNnhUplf5X4pdQxIH6hQLd-apuFmBLvewSaQm4-DI9oF/s1600/njc.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="323" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0cyKLRTblfFD8MvafA7iRDP9ZlFAjRa8c3UJ4b6gFYxeStWlf-CE-oCnYmohmdZ95F1Vvr_RLltNeUkza4lBo1_ICiWKVKtMYiNnhUplf5X4pdQxIH6hQLd-apuFmBLvewSaQm4-DI9oF/s640/njc.JPG" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Properly managed businesses eliminate jobs all the time; indeed,
reducing labor costs (which is a more attractive way of saying laying people
off) is often taken to be a sign of efficient management. And while lowering
the cost of capital, which is what happens when the business equipment tax is
cut, may well encourage investment, new plant and equipment coming on line can
displace workers rather than leading to new hiring. Consider the mechanization of agriculture: When farmers replaced steam
threshers and mule teams with combines and tractors, thousands of people lost their jobs.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjpicyZkqIIauDWjTj7O_owbWwMU7UdoStDOpSeDX5-_OfVfRoo32der0CINDHAbVhYKqfJ6ReBQa5ml4SotmaMH8oiy-M_WAJ0FO5C6codfAY2vsHCaZL3h5YzXJtPa1t2lpFqhTikLbN/s1600/ag.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="427" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjpicyZkqIIauDWjTj7O_owbWwMU7UdoStDOpSeDX5-_OfVfRoo32der0CINDHAbVhYKqfJ6ReBQa5ml4SotmaMH8oiy-M_WAJ0FO5C6codfAY2vsHCaZL3h5YzXJtPa1t2lpFqhTikLbN/s640/ag.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Now obviously, all those combines
crawling across the land were a good thing, even if they did put a lot of
people out of work. They dramatically increased agricultural productivity and
output. Investment in plant and equipment contributes importantly to the growth
of employment and economic activity, but firms do not build new factories or
buy new machines and computers because they are itching to create jobs. They
buy that stuff in order to produce more efficiently, lower costs, improve
product quality and ultimately make more money. Business equipment is not being taxed to “punish
job creators.” It’s being taxed, like all other property, because is enhances
the ability of its owners to generate income and pay a fair share of the costs
of government services from which they benefit.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
* Given these changes in its
structure, it’s a mystery how Gianforte concludes that the business equipment
tax is “one of the most regressive on the books in Montana.” A regressive tax
is one that falls disproportionately on low income individuals and households,
and it’s hard to imagine that those are the folks that own the large businesses
paying the business equipment tax.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
** The problem here is not just
with the logic. Montana’s economy, and the state’s budget, are actually
performing well. But as Dave Parker, at the Big Sky Political Analysis blog, points
out, Gianforte is <a href="http://bigskypolitics.blogspot.com/2016_01_01_archive.html">relying on
the wrong data</a> to get to the opposite conclusion. He’s got to do that, of
course; otherwise, what would he run on? </div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-11360089230627535872016-04-27T10:40:00.000-06:002016-04-27T10:40:55.784-06:00Budgeting by Area Code<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Last week Greg Gianforte
announced something he’s calling his “<a href="http://www.gregformontana.com/posts/news/406-tax-relief">406 Tax Relief</a>” plan. Strip away the spin, and what this scheme
amounts to is the elimination, over 4 years, of the business equipment tax, and
a reduction of the top marginal income tax rate from 6.9 to 6 percent. Together, those
two tax cuts would eat up about $200 million a year in revenue, which Gianforte
plans to pay for by freezing state spending. So: <i>4</i> years, <i>0</i> increase in
state spending, and <i>6</i> percent and
there you have it: a budget plan inspired by an area code!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<br />Not surprisingly, there’s no
guarantee at all that this thing will work. Gianforte admits that his freeze on
spending can happen only after we make some badly needed but unspecified investments
in education, job training and infrastructure. Oh, and then we also have to
account for the effects of inflation and population growth. Nobody knows how
much all those things are going to cost us nor if, after coughing up $200
million a year in tax cuts, we’ll have the revenue to cover it, but Gianforte
blandly assures us that “technology should help us generate some efficiencies
elsewhere.” If that doesn’t work, we’ll probably just have to do what they’re
doing in <a href="http://cjonline.com/news/2016-04-24/returning-kansas-lawmakers-face-closing-budget-shortfalls">Kansas</a>
right now, in the aftermath of big tax cuts, and that’s to slash funding for
essential programs. You know, things like schools, or health care, or highway
safety. This is <a href="http://barrettforsd47.blogspot.com/2016/04/struggling-to-survive-revolution.html">Reaganism</a>
at its finest: cut taxes first and ask questions later.|<br /><br />It may seem that a budget plan like
this is a complete mess, but believe it or not, for Gianforte it actually
represents a modicum of progress. For the last couple of months, Gianforte was
running around the state touting these same tax cuts, but was planning to pay
for them by using up the cash reserves the state keeps in the bank in case of a
budget emergency. As I pointed out in an <a href="http://barrettforsd47.blogspot.com/2016/03/losing-touch-with-reality.html">earlier
post</a>, there were two big flies in that ointment. For one thing, Gianforte grossly
overestimated the reserves he would have to work with. And more to the
point, you simply can’t pay for permanent tax cuts with cash reserves, because the cuts
are forever but the reserves are gone - spent down to zero - in a year or so.
What’re you going to do then? No, budget
arithmetic pretty much dictates that if you have to balance the budget and you
want to cut taxes, you’ll have to cut spending as well. And with this new tax plan, Gianforte is
reluctantly acknowledging that painful reality.<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Gianforte may have the budget
math down, but he’s still in the dark when it comes to budget policy. Every
other year the legislature and the governor, Republicans and Democrats, get
together in Helena to hammer out a biennial budget. It’s a difficult,
contentious and wrenching process. There are all sorts of ways we can use tax
dollars, and there’s not enough of those dollars to do everything we should or
would like to do. So coming up with a budget requires some thoughtful weighing
of the alternatives. And what Gianforte is proposing – to first and foremost cut
taxes and then let the chips fall where they may – is about as far from
thoughtful as you can get. But then what can you expect from a guy who actually relies on an area code to get his budgetary priorities lined up?<o:p></o:p></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-32267362656625263162016-04-11T15:28:00.001-06:002016-04-11T15:28:58.580-06:00Finding a Well Planned Path<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Here, by way of a "guest post," is a letter to legislators from Tom Schneider, a former member of the Public Service Commission. Tom asks whether or not it's a good idea - for either tax or rate payers - for Northwestern Energy to buy the coal-fired power plants at Colstrip, presumably to prevent what is otherwise their likely closure. For me, the critical concern here is that we not, by locking ourselves into the Colstrip plants now, tie our hands when, some day in the future, we need to put in place an efficient, cost effective policy to cut carbon emissions. And I don't think that day is very far off. But here's Tom's take:</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
April 9, 2016<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Dear Legislators:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I served as a Montana Public Service Commissioner from
1977-1984 and again from 2003-2006. I am deeply concerned about the rash of
proposals and media flurry regarding Colstrip’s future, particularly the
suggestion that NorthWestern Energy (NorthWestern) purchase a larger portion of
the Colstrip plant. There are enormous economic and environmental risks
associated with these coal plants. As a former Commissioner I understand what
it takes to plan energy systems. I understand about protecting consumers from
risks. And these proposals are absolutely heading in the wrong direction.
NorthWestern’s purchase of any additional portion of Colstrip could very well
put Montana ratepayers and taxpayers at risk.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The ownership structure of the Colstrip plant is complex
(see table at the end of this letter). The two older units, 1 & 2 are owned
by Puget Sound Energy (PSE) and Talen Energy. PSE is a regulated utility and
Talen Energy is an unregulated power provider. (Talen took control of PPL’s
share of Colstrip and its operating obligations last year when PPL spun off all
of its unregulated assets, including Colstrip, into a new company named Talen
Energy.) Recent red flags raised by regulators, financial analysts, and the
owners should not be ignored. The Washington Utilities and Transportation
Commission (WUTC), the entity that regulates PSE, expressed concern after it
reviewed the economic viability of the two older units, 1 & 2. An analysis
by NorthWestern showed significant financial liability associated with
purchasing PPL’s coal plants, and particularly Units 1 & 2. Independent
financial analysts who review Talen, have increasingly expressed concern
regarding the significant and mounting liabilities associated with the plants. The
conclusions of all three is that the older two units of Colstrip are
increasingly uneconomic.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The WUTC has not only expressed concern regarding the two
older units’ economic viability<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_edn1" name="_ednref1" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[i]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
but recently completed an analysis of PSE’s remediation obligations for units 1
& 2.<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_edn2" name="_ednref2" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[ii]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
PSE and UTC analyses provide a glimpse into the hefty price tag that Montana
ratepayers and/or taxpayers could shoulder if ownership is transferred to
NorthWestern.<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_edn3" name="_ednref3" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[iii]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
In its remediation analysis, largely based on data provided by PSE, the WUTC
determined that the preliminary estimate of environmental remediation and
decommissioning costs for units 1 & 2 would be $134 million to $195 million
(the report said that the law contains no decommissioning requirements). The
report said that these costs would increase the longer the plant stayed open.
If either PSE’s or Talen’s share of Colstrip were to shift to NorthWestern,
Montana ratepayers could be on the hook for those costs. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Financial analysts have also issued warnings to Talen Energy
about Colstrip continuing to be a highly risky investment. UBS, an
international financial firm, was PPL’s financial advisor when it tried to sell
all of its generation assets to NorthWestern, including the Colstrip plant.<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_edn4" name="_ednref4" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[iv]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
UBS issued a report on March 7, 2016, in which it called Colstrip a
“money-losing” asset for Talen. It said that Talen should find a way to
monetize its ownership in the plant.
This declining valuation is reflected in Talen’s property taxes to the
State of Montana and local governments. In the last three years PPL and Talen
have written down the value of its interest in Colstrip by 87%, meaning its
share of Colstrip 1, 2, and 3 has no real value.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ultimately, NorthWestern has already determined that
purchasing any portion of Colstrip would be a risky investment. In 2013, when
it purchased the hydroelectric dams from PPL, its own analysis showed that also
purchasing PPL’s share of the Colstrip plant would be a major liability. At
that time, NorthWestern assigned a <i>negative</i>
$340 million value to PPL coal plants and a negative $127 million value to
Colstrip units 1 and 2 specifically.<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_edn5" name="_ednref5" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">[v]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></a>
Since 2013, the liabilities have only increased.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In its most recent planning document submitted to the
Montana Public Service Commission, NorthWestern acknowledges it does not need
the additional power. That means the intent of this proposal is probably for
NorthWestern to purchase additional power to serve large industrial customers
that are currently buying power on the open market and likely contracting for
power with Talen (because that information is proprietary it is impossible to
know for certain where Montana’s industrial customers get their power). If the
large industrial customers, who sought deregulation and embraced the market,
believe that the Colstrip plant has value then they ought to acquire the plants
themselves. This negative value means that Talen and PSE might even have to pay
NorthWestern (or the large industrials) to take these plants off their hands –
an absurd result.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is likely that NorthWestern would only consider buying an
additional interest in Colstrip if the state of Montana and taxpayers and/or
ratepayers subsidize the financial and environmental liabilities. That scenario
would be disastrous. Montana taxpayers and ratepayers should not foot the bill.
Instead of placing an additional and hefty burden on Montana businesses and
families, Montanans should be working on prudent Montana energy solutions.
Planning a different energy future will take time and resources. It will
require detailed assessments of remediation obligations, worker and community
responsibilities, reliability and transmission studies, contracts, and more. Considerable
progress was being made in Montana prior to the unprecedented action of the
U.S. Supreme Court to stay the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power
Plan. The positive Montana momentum has been slowed and the uncertainties
magnified. The delay has sidetracked productive efforts with a rash of
half-baked ideas and political theatre from major political candidates of both
parties. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Montana deserves better. We need real Montana solutions, not
false hope. The workers and the community of Colstrip deserve our focused
attention. Utilities need certainty. Consumers need to be protected. We don’t
need to be distracted from the important challenges before us. The market is
determining Colstrip’s fate. Concerns about the economic, public health, and
environmental impacts of climate change are helping to drive the market. Our
job is to help Montana have a thoughtful and well planned path to a cleaner,
more affordable energy system. Montana has a responsibility to build a better
energy future. We must not squander that opportunity.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sincerely,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Thomas J. Schneider</div>
<div>
<hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" />
<!--[endif]-->
<div id="edn1">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_ednref1" name="_edn1" title=""></a><b><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt;">Colstrip
Ownership Structure<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; border: none; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-insideh: .5pt solid windowtext; mso-border-insidev: .5pt solid windowtext; mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184;">
<tbody>
<tr style="height: 14.05pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0;">
<td style="border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 140.25pt;" valign="top" width="234">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Owner<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-left: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.05in;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Unit 1 <o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-left: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Unit 2<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-left: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Unit 3<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-left: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Unit 4<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 14.05pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 140.25pt;" valign="top" width="234">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Puget Sound Energy<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.05in;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
50%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
50%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
25%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
25%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 14.1pt; mso-yfti-irow: 2;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 140.25pt;" valign="top" width="234">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Talen Energy<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.05in;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
50%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
50%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
30%*<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 14.05pt; mso-yfti-irow: 3;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 140.25pt;" valign="top" width="234">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Portland General Electric<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.05in;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
20%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
20%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 14.1pt; mso-yfti-irow: 4;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 140.25pt;" valign="top" width="234">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
NorthWestern Energy<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.05in;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
30%*<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 14.05pt; mso-yfti-irow: 5;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 140.25pt;" valign="top" width="234">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Avista<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.05in;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
15%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.05pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
15%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr style="height: 14.1pt; mso-yfti-irow: 6; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">
<td style="border-top: none; border: solid windowtext 1.0pt; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 140.25pt;" valign="top" width="234">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
Pacificorp<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 1.05in;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
10%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
<td style="border-bottom: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-left: none; border-right: solid windowtext 1.0pt; border-top: none; height: 14.1pt; mso-border-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-left-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid windowtext .5pt; padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; width: 75.65pt;" valign="top" width="126">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
10%<o:p></o:p></div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span lang="X-NONE">*Talen Energy and NorthWestern Energy
have an agreement to share the output of units 3 & 4. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<u><span lang="X-NONE">Endnotes<o:p></o:p></span></u></div>
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: X-NONE; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: X-NONE;">[i]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span><span lang="X-NONE"> Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission Comments on
Puget Sound Energy’s Cosltrip Study, Docket UE-120767, Feb. 6, 2014.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div id="edn2">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_ednref2" name="_edn2" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: X-NONE; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: X-NONE;">[ii]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span lang="X-NONE"> WUTC, “Investigation Report. Investigation of coal-fired
generation unit decommissioning and remediation costs.” UE-151500, Feb. 2016<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div id="edn3">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_ednref3" name="_edn3" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: X-NONE; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: X-NONE;">[iii]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span lang="X-NONE"> Puget Sound Energy’s 2013 and 2015, Electric and Natural Gas Integrated
Resource Plans.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div id="edn4">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_ednref4" name="_edn4" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: X-NONE; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: X-NONE;">[iv]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span lang="X-NONE"> NorthWestern Energy, Application for Approval to Purchase and
Operate PPL Montana’s Electricity Supply Rates, for Approval of Issuance of
Securities to Complete the Purchase, and for Related Relief, Testimony and Exhibits,
Docket No. D2013.12.85, December 2013.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
<div id="edn5">
<div class="MsoEndnoteText">
<a href="file:///C:/Users/Dick%20Barrett/Downloads/4-8-16%20Schneider%20Colstrip%20legislator%20letter.doc#_ednref5" name="_edn5" title=""><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE"><!--[if !supportFootnotes]--><span class="MsoEndnoteReference"><span lang="X-NONE" style="font-family: "Cambria","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt; mso-ansi-language: X-NONE; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: Cambria; mso-fareast-language: X-NONE;">[v]</span></span><!--[endif]--></span></span></a><span lang="X-NONE"> Ibid. And NorthWestern Energy Submittal to Public Servic
Commission, Project Mustang Valuation Spreadsheet, “PSC-066 Mustang Valuation –
2032 Case - 6-24-13.”<o:p></o:p></span></div>
</div>
</div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3079373511743483189.post-39398697241814967772016-04-06T15:19:00.000-06:002016-04-07T09:32:18.015-06:00Struggling to Survive the Revolution<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Superficially, at any rate, there
are some striking similarities between Greg Gianforte and Donald Trump. They
are both business guys who have made piles of money and can pretty much pay for
their own campaigns. They are both outsiders who assure us they will clean
house if they end up in the Governor’s Mansion or the White House. When it comes to public policy, they both
have ideas that are mind bogglingly half baked. And they both claim that as
captains of industry, if elected they would know how to “create jobs.”<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
But there the similarity ends.
Unlike Trump, Gianforte is not a loud-mouthed, misogynistic, narcissistic,
bullying fool. So far as I know, he does not think he can force Mexico to build
a wall on its northern border (although for a lot of Mexicans, that’s beginning
to look like a pretty good idea). There’s no evidence that he’s obsessed with
the size of his hands and his sexual prowess. He doesn’t recommend beating up
people who disagree with him, or torturing prisoners of war, or bombing their
children. And unlike Trump, Gianforte is not trying to tear to shreds the
Reaganism that has inhabited Republican thinking for the last 35 years.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
Reaganism, as David Brooks
describes it in a recent <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/25/opinion/the-post-trump-era.html?smid=nytcore-ipad-share&smprod=nytcore-ipad&_r=0">New
York Times column</a>, is that familiar notion that the road to economic
prosperity is paved with deregulation and tax cuts, especially for the rich. And
it’s the belief that when those policies unleash the energies of the private
sector and the pace of economic growth quickens, all boats will rise with the
tide, and prosperity will trickle down.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
The trouble is, Brooks says,
Reaganism just doesn’t work any more (if it ever did), and Republicans, in
their heart of hearts, know it. They
know instead that “<span style="background: white;">technological change,
globalization and social and family breakdown mean that the benefits of growth,
to the extent there is growth, are not widely shared.</span>” Ideologically,
they are in a crisis, looking for a new and better way to understand the world
and needing desperately to respond to the mostly white, typically not-well-educated
men in their base who are the ones who have not “widely shared” in the benefits
of growth. It’s a situation that’s ripe for Trump to step into - not, of
course, because he can lead the Republican party onto firmer ground - but
because he is a port in the storm to people for whom the party has become
little more than a trail of false promises.<br />
<br />
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">And that’s where Greg Gainforte comes in. Despite being
an outsider and an entrepreneur and a fresh face and a job creator, Gianforte
is still peddling the old time, Reaganite Republican religion. He says he is
going to make things all better by bringing in “good jobs,” but if you’re
paying attention, you’ll notice that the way he's going to do that sounds like he’s
channeling Reagan himself. He wants to cut taxes on capital gains and on the
personal property of big businesses. He promises to get rid of pesky
regulations. He refuses to say where he is on right to work. He’d appoint a
business guy to run the Department of Environmental Quality, presumably because
more business is better for us than a clean environment. All the things, in
other words, that orthodox Republicans have pinned their hopes on since the
1980s.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">Brooks argues that the Republican world view – Reaganism
- is in a crisis brought on by its increasing inability to explain reality. And
invoking the theories of Thomas Kuhn, Brooks says that that world view is about
to undergo a revolution – an abrupt and wrenching shift in perspective –
impelled by the ravings of Donald Trump.* That could be, and if it is, it looks
like a revolution Greg Gianforte will struggle to survive.<br /><br /><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background: white; mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;">*Kuhn’s book, <i>The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions</i>, first published in 1962, itself
developed a revolutionary account of how science progresses over time.
Personally, I think it’s a bit of a stretch for Brooks to apply Kuhn’s thinking
to what’s happening in the Republican party, but it’s an engaging argument.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Dick Barretthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15854509633249432155noreply@blogger.com0