Max Baucus dogpile

You know, it's supposed to be the job of sites like ours to critique Sen. Max Baucus. While we realize that Baucus is hardly beloved on the Montana left for many reasons, not least of which was Baucus's vote for the Bush tax cuts, sometimes it really feels like the right's thunder is getting unfairly stolen.

After having watched Baucus woodenly make his way through an interview with the Helena IR editorial board this week, we are again astounded that Republicans have been losing to this guy for nearly 3 decades.

We realize that Democrats asked themselves the same thing about Conrad Burns for 18 years. And this is indeed a valid comparison, since Max Baucus is pretty much just Conrad Burns without the latter's keen mind and penetrating charisma.

But it really is something to watch the left go at Baucus. The latest stimulator that is drawing the big fish to the surface is a recent article in The Nation. As we have confessed before, we really don't read The Nation as often as we perhaps should, and thus we miss a lot of the good stuff.

Anyway, we learn that Left in the West and Baucus are "definitely from different parts of the 'big tent.'" And at one of our favorite sites, 4&20 Blackbirds, we learn of "a new split forming between grassroots populists and corporate-sponsored DC insiders that doesn’t necessarily follow party lines..." And furthermore we learn that populists on the left may not feel like spending their "weekends trolling the neighborhoods in the pouring rain, in (Baucus's) name..."

Perhaps the most interesting item was that Baucus hit up 50 K-Street lobbyists to raise $100,000 each for his re-election campaign. Think about it -- that would be $5 million before the "Friends of Max Baucus" even get started with the rubber-chicken circuit. Now, we already know that Denny Rehberg -- his most dangerous opponent -- isn't running (even though Gazette polling in December put him and Baucus in a statistical tie in a hypothetical match-up.)

So why the desperate need for that kind of money -- and, no less, through the kind of activity that Montana voters recently found distasteful enough to kick out a 3 term Republican in favor of a Jon Tester?

Perhaps Baucus is afraid of that state House majority leader who carries a union card and wears a hard-hat, after all. Or perhaps he realizes (as did many Republicans during the last election) that the Tester campaign wrote the campaign ads against him: he's been in Washington too long, he's lost touch with Montana, and he took money from Abramoff.

Or is Baucus perhaps less worried about any potential Republican challenger than he is about a challenge of a different kind? Might our state's most popular Democrat quietly get the party's already unhappy activists and populists to pressure Baucus to step down -- letting that populist bolo-wearing guy head to Washington in 2008 rather than having to wait until 2012 or beyond?

All interesting stuff -- Montana Headlines is increasingly convinced that Baucus, far from being one of the Democratic party's safest bets, is more vulnerable in 2008 than he has been in any previous election. On reflection, perhaps Baucus is smarter than he seems -- maybe he does need all that money.

Eastern Montana -- random political notes

Oil Money grab, redux: A couple of weeks ago, Montana Headlines brought an article in the Sidney Herald to our readers' attention, in which we learned that a retired Univ. of Montana environmental studies professor -- Rep. Ron Erickson, D-Missoula, was attempting to lay his environmentally clean hands on dirty oil money in order to spend it in his own backyard (well, he proposed that the revenues be distributed according to population, which amounts to the same thing.)

In a follow-up article, we learn that the bill was tabled in committee, which means that it would now take 51 votes on the floor to "blast it out of committee," and that isn't at all likely to happen. Looks like Eastern Montana dodged a bullet there.

"A slap in the face of Eastern Montana": Speaking of dodging bullets, we yesterday briefly mentioned the attempt by Sen. Wanzenried, D-Missoula, to set up a deal whereby the state would buy Plum Creek land around Missoula -- and then sell off public land in Eastern Montana in exchange.

We watched these proceedings with interest on television, and the best line from Sen. Dan McGee, R-Laurel, in his spirited (and successful) opposition is the one given in the title of this segment (and quoted in the Gazette.) The Gazette continues with McGee's comments:

"Well, I guess if we want to make a park of everything west of the Continental Divide, this is the way to do it," McGee said.

He criticized the bill for targeting the land of one company "at the expense of the people east of the Continental Divide."

We note that Lane Larson, D-Billings, crossed party lines to vote with the good guys on this one, and that our loyal Eastern Montana guy -- Sam Kitzenberg -- voted with his new masters in Missoula and Helena instead of with his fellow Eastern Montanans.

Sen. Jon Tester tries to wow the provincials by phone: The Miles City Star reports on the conference call that our newly-minted Sen. Jon Tester had with Eastern Montana journalists a few days ago.

Tester is quoted as saying "We need affordable health care. That could suck all my energy." The story goes on to say that Tester is on the Senate Energy committee and so will assign a staffer to brief him periodically on health issues. With a straight journalistic face, the Star reports that Tester said he would "focus his attention on energy issues."

We're confused... wasn't health care going to suck all his energy? Or does he need to focus on energy because he won't have any energy left over? We are going to have to read John Halbert's pieces for the Star more closely in the future -- one wonders if Tester's staffers will pick up the apparently tongue-in-cheek treatment that the paper in one of our favorite towns gave him.

Tester waxes 9/11 as he answers questions about the St. Mary's Diversion project, saying that "it's not if but when a disaster strikes," and talking about what will happen "if it blows up." (Are terrorists targeting the project?) But he has a solution -- "start moving dirt."

And the direst warning of all is that it's not just a northern Montana thing: "if this project fails, it will affect the economy of the whole of Montana, and it will impact the whole Northwest." Tester forgot to add "the nation, the world, and beyond..."

It certainly isn't just something that would affect just a few people in the Milk River area, and it could be that a problem with the St. Mary's diversion would shake Seattle and Portland to the core, but we doubt it.

And for the pièce de résistance, there's this beauty about global warming: "We want to make sure the polar ice caps don't melt and Glacier Park doesn't have to change its name."

As we've said before, we sure did trade up when we elected Jon Tester.

And to think, he's the more intelligent and articulate of our two Senators.