Monday potpourri

So much going on, so little time. Montana Headlines realizes that our faithful readers probably prefer things like our Harper's-length musings on the Edwards bloggers and bipartisan political correctness. Yet there are a few things in today's press that are notable enough to deserve brief comments, but not so much as to receive lengthy treatment.

Political Armageddon comes to Montana: Yes, it's true. Monica Lindeen has started campaigning for the State Auditor position 3 1/2 months after the last election. You heard it right -- State Auditor. Interminable campaigns are annoying enough when it is for offices like, well, the President of the United States of America. But are Montanans really going to have a stomach for this?

Constitutional amendments and reapportionment: It never ceases to amaze Montana Headlines that so many state constitutions are cluttered documents full of things that should be simple statutory law. With the magnificent simplicity of the U.S. Constitution as an example, it is a wonder that states don't imitate it more. So we look on most of the proposed amendments to the Montana Constitution with a jaundiced eye, even when we agree with the proposed policies such as limiting the taxable value of properties owned by senior citizens, whose fixed incomes are strained by exploding property values in some Montana communities.

One that is probably worth considering, however, is the amendment by Sen. Jim Shockley, R-Victor, "to require that the fifth member and presiding officer of the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission chosen by the other four members be a retired state or federal District Court judge or retired state Supreme Court justice." The last reapportionment drew attention to the highly partisan composition of the Montana Supreme Court at that time, which was not all bad, since it drew attention to the way that the Montana Trial Lawyers Association has come to dominate the judicial selection process in this state.

But we should not have to depend on hopes for a non-partisan Supreme Court for fair reapportionment. If the 5th member has to be a retired judge or justice, then there is a higher chance that Republicans and Democrats will be able to agree on that 5th member, and if the Supreme Court still has to appoint someone, it will be someone whose record of legal fairness or unfairness will be a matter of public record.

John Tester refuses to get his hair cut in D.C.: We learn this in the midst of a fluffy Great Falls Tribune article about how Sen. Tester is settling in there in Washington. It is a relief to learn this, though. We had been getting quite worried about what those Beltway barbers would do to that flattop.

The Missoulian wants to eliminate a government position: In an opinion piece, the editors make an excellent case for why we don't need a Commissioner of Political Practices in Montana anymore. They rightly point out that it is outdated in the era of the internet, since reporting campaign finances was the "most useful function of the office." We're all for eliminating many government positions and jobs -- this sounds like a good one to put at the top of the list.

Democrats don't like drilling for it, but they do like spending the proceeds

The Sidney Herald drew our attention to a bill submitted by Ron Erickson, D-Missoula
to redistribute oil tax revenues in a way that would, not surprisingly, take those revenues and spend them on roads in the most populous counties in the state.

In a classic understatement, the Herald describes the bill as "what most eastern Montana residents hope isn't a sign of things to come..."

Richland County Commissioner Don Steppler describes it as a process whereby "the top 10 counties in the state will receive a huge windfall."

Erickson, a "retired University of Montana environmental studies professor," is presumably one of those Democrats who makes things as difficult as possible for oil development to take place -- but rather enjoys taking the proceeds and spending it in his own backyard. Doesn't really seem to fit in with the concept of environmentally responsible investing and other efforts not to touch tainted money, does it?

The counties that work to promote oil development and who bear the brunt of the impact -- labor shortages, rising cost of living, wear and tear on roads, temporarily decreased revenue from agricultural land taken out of production, and environmental impact -- should have a greatly disproportionate share in the revenue. It is hypocrisy of the highest degree to oppose oil development but covet the money, although we will be happy to revise our judgment if we learn that Erickson is actually a big friend of Montana's oil industry.

According to the Herald, Sen. Don Steinbeisser, R-Sidney (whose district has part of Richland County) said, "We have to kill this bill."

We're wondering why the Herald didn't contact the Senator who represents the other part of Richland County -- Sen. Sam Kitzenberg, D-Glasgow -- for his comments on this bill.

Presumably he will be putting his new influence in the state Democratic party to use in looking out for his constituents in Richland County, and the Herald should have given him the chance to have a little of the spotlight, too.