Not only did the Ron Paul folks apparently take over the National Affairs subcommittee of the Montana GOP platform committee, but now an (admittedly weakly worded) right-to-work plank got added. (H/T Missoulapolis, where Carol continues her great convention coverage.)
This nonsense needs to stop. It is fine for individual Republicans to run on right-to-work, but it shouldn't be an official policy of the party platform. Regardless of how hostile unions are to the Republican party (but not always -- after all they endorsed Alan Olson in his critical PSC 3 race,) there is just no sense to this sort of thing. Brad Molnar was not amused, and neither are we.
Set aside the political suicide of it, at least for candidates running in so many parts of Montana. There is also a free-market case to be made against right-to-work legislation. Think of it this way: right-to-work laws take away the right of an employer to have the stability of a union contract with its work force.
There needs to be a balance between labor and employers, with neither having the upper hand. Since Taft-Hartley, unions have not had the upper hand, and the balance has been reasonable, by and large. Robert Taft believed that if you don't have unions and employers -- two private entities -- negotiating with each other, government is bound eventually to be the one that will step in and tell people what to do in disputes. How is that an improvement?
There are reasons why Montana has a less-than-favorable business climate, but we have yet to be convinced that our not being a right-to-work state is one of those reasons.
It sounds like there are a few things to be ignored in the Montana Republican platform by candidates -- and quite a few things that need to be re-addressed in two years.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Obama making serious play for Montana
In a note that should make Sen. McCain's campaign sit up and take notice, Sen. Obama appointed a high-profile campaign director for Montana and a number of other states that have recently been Republican strongholds in the Presidential election.
Granted, it is possible that Obama simply has money to burn, and is willing to expend it in ways that make the McCain campaign work for states that they should be able to take for granted.
And Obama's campaign seems to be showing the important insight that there are benefits to ones party of running stronger than expected even in states one is destined to lose. Parties in states that have long been ignored are going to get some attention, and may make gains in down-ticket races due to Obama putting resources into those states.
Will the McCain campaign and the RNC answer in kind in Montana, or will they make the mistake of ignoring Montana Republicans in an hour of great need? We shall see, but suffice it to say that if the McCain campaign and the national Republican Party don't expend some resources in Montana, not only will McCain run the risk of losing the state in the fall (or have to expend precious last-minute resources to stave off an Obama surge,) but Montana Republicans could lose in what should otherwise be a very competitive year for regaining control of the state Senate and winning down-ticket races like Tim Fox's race for AG or Duane Grime's bid for State Auditor.
Few Republicans seem to be holding their breath, expecting that any help is coming from the national party. Instead, there seems to be the knowledge that we are on our own, and a determination that Montana can be successful in the fall elections with only ourselves to depend on -- and our own Congressman Denny Rehberg seems to understand this better than anyone. Which isn't an entirely bad thing at all. If there isn't any help coming, the sooner one realizes it, but more prepared one is to defend oneself.
Granted, it is possible that Obama simply has money to burn, and is willing to expend it in ways that make the McCain campaign work for states that they should be able to take for granted.
And Obama's campaign seems to be showing the important insight that there are benefits to ones party of running stronger than expected even in states one is destined to lose. Parties in states that have long been ignored are going to get some attention, and may make gains in down-ticket races due to Obama putting resources into those states.
Will the McCain campaign and the RNC answer in kind in Montana, or will they make the mistake of ignoring Montana Republicans in an hour of great need? We shall see, but suffice it to say that if the McCain campaign and the national Republican Party don't expend some resources in Montana, not only will McCain run the risk of losing the state in the fall (or have to expend precious last-minute resources to stave off an Obama surge,) but Montana Republicans could lose in what should otherwise be a very competitive year for regaining control of the state Senate and winning down-ticket races like Tim Fox's race for AG or Duane Grime's bid for State Auditor.
Few Republicans seem to be holding their breath, expecting that any help is coming from the national party. Instead, there seems to be the knowledge that we are on our own, and a determination that Montana can be successful in the fall elections with only ourselves to depend on -- and our own Congressman Denny Rehberg seems to understand this better than anyone. Which isn't an entirely bad thing at all. If there isn't any help coming, the sooner one realizes it, but more prepared one is to defend oneself.
The governor doesn't want to debate in front of smaller-town audiences
So Roy Brown calls for 18 debates, and the governor predictably says no.
Not sure why he wouldn't want to debate in smaller communities -- after all, the governor and his supporters have been trying to pin the old "big oil" label on Sen. Roy Brown (as if it would be something to be ashamed of even if it were true.) The governor needs to spend just a wee bit more time with the folks in Billings, where he will discover that there simply isn't any "big oil" here. If he thinks that what we have here is "big oil," then he needs to get out more -- to places other than California fundraising soirées, that is.
And then the governor's spokesmen are apparently now trying to make an issue out of the fact that Roy Brown went to high school in... Wyoming.
Wow. Talk about nailing one of those uppity foreigners to the wall.
We seem to recall an article from during the last legislative session indicating that a very large percentage (at least 40%) of Montanans weren't born here -- will they be amused by the governor trying to make an issue out of Brown being from such a distant and exotic locale as... Wyoming?
Or maybe the guv is just unhappy about the fact that Roy Brown is continually reminding Montanans in this campaign about how Wyoming (and North Dakota) are making money hand-over-fist in the energy industry while by contrast Montana's governor has been sitting on his hands when it comes to energy policy (and shaking his fists at anyone who crosses him.)
And the Brown campaign won the round with this one alone:
In response to Schweitzer's call for five debates, Brown's spokesman Tyler Matthews called it "disappointing that the governor doesn't want to go anywhere in the state where there won't be a TV camera."
Ouch. We definitely want to see Brown and Schweitzer debating in places like Miles City, Sidney, and Dillon. But we can expect to see the governor dodging that sort of thing. While he talks the rural talk, he's really more comfortable in Missoula and Helena -- when he has to be here in Montana at all.
When it comes right down to it, the governor's race is the only really big game in town this year -- the press should want to milk it for all it's worth, and press for a long series of debates. The governor may have to miss a few out of state fundraisers -- but we think the sacrifice would be worth it.
Update: More at Big Sky Cairn.
Not sure why he wouldn't want to debate in smaller communities -- after all, the governor and his supporters have been trying to pin the old "big oil" label on Sen. Roy Brown (as if it would be something to be ashamed of even if it were true.) The governor needs to spend just a wee bit more time with the folks in Billings, where he will discover that there simply isn't any "big oil" here. If he thinks that what we have here is "big oil," then he needs to get out more -- to places other than California fundraising soirées, that is.
And then the governor's spokesmen are apparently now trying to make an issue out of the fact that Roy Brown went to high school in... Wyoming.
Wow. Talk about nailing one of those uppity foreigners to the wall.
We seem to recall an article from during the last legislative session indicating that a very large percentage (at least 40%) of Montanans weren't born here -- will they be amused by the governor trying to make an issue out of Brown being from such a distant and exotic locale as... Wyoming?
Or maybe the guv is just unhappy about the fact that Roy Brown is continually reminding Montanans in this campaign about how Wyoming (and North Dakota) are making money hand-over-fist in the energy industry while by contrast Montana's governor has been sitting on his hands when it comes to energy policy (and shaking his fists at anyone who crosses him.)
And the Brown campaign won the round with this one alone:
In response to Schweitzer's call for five debates, Brown's spokesman Tyler Matthews called it "disappointing that the governor doesn't want to go anywhere in the state where there won't be a TV camera."
Ouch. We definitely want to see Brown and Schweitzer debating in places like Miles City, Sidney, and Dillon. But we can expect to see the governor dodging that sort of thing. While he talks the rural talk, he's really more comfortable in Missoula and Helena -- when he has to be here in Montana at all.
When it comes right down to it, the governor's race is the only really big game in town this year -- the press should want to milk it for all it's worth, and press for a long series of debates. The governor may have to miss a few out of state fundraisers -- but we think the sacrifice would be worth it.
Update: More at Big Sky Cairn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)