When the local Great Falls (Montana) school levy was defeated, I wrote a commentary about it and figured that would be about all I’d have to say about it. I had written a column before that expressing my support for the levy request, which would cost me a little more than $15.71 per year.

The levy was defeated and life goes on…

But then I happened to read an advertisement in the local newspaper from a group called Citizens Against Higher Taxes (CAHT). In my opinion they kind of had the “spike the ball” attitude toward those who supported the levy. So I must offer my commentary about this advertisement:

It seems the group purchased some advertisements called “An Open letter to the GFPS Administration, Board of Trustees and Teachers Union” in which they claim the school district “is implementing a new bullying program and is now acting like the bully.” They contend “Anyone who opposes their viewpoint is a target of retaliation.” They also say they “expect a new attitude from the Board of Trustees and top administrators…”

The first thing I thought about was that these people were against spending an extra $15-$20 a year to educate children, but they just spent several hundred dollars on these advertisements. The black and white ad was about 3.5 by 5 inches and ran for at least two days – and I’d bet it’s pretty expensive for people who are pinching pennies.

Secondly, after reading the rambling and sometimes incoherent “Open Letter” I thought these people could use some additional….but that is kind of spiteful so I won’t say it.

Personally, I don’t like higher taxes. The Federal Government spends too much. Our country is in deep debt. But I also understand that my taxes pay for fire and police protection, the military, decent streets (even though mine are not plowed in the winter), and I like it that my children receive a quality education. I felt that spending a few extra dollars a month was worth it. I like to see my children play an instrument in the school orchestra, learn a foreign language, play volleyball, and participate in track – all activities that might be cut back some next year.

But that’s OK, the “people” have spoken…and the word is out that Great Falls, Montana, said “No” to their children.

I think that’s a good thing.

What surprised me was the reaction of U.S. Senator Jon Tester who owns property in Montana. The Great Falls Tribune published a story today about Rehberg’s bill and reported the following comments from Tester:

Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., said he believes the Interior Department has done a good job of seeking public backing and moving ahead on programs for which local residents voice support. He said Rehberg, who is running against him for the Senate in 2012, is making much ado about nothing.

“I think this all drummed up by him. This whole thing about monuments. It’s a figment of his imagination that’s got people fired up,” said Tester, who has pressed Salazar on the issue. “I’d be fired up about it, too, if I thought it was real, but I don’t think it’s real. I do not think there’s a grand plot.”

I guess Tester won’t be introducing a companion bill in the U.S. Senate…

After reading those remarks it seems to me that Tester has allowed his ongoing senatorial campaign against Rehberg to percolate into his job as Montana’s Senator.

Historically, Tester is wrong in saying the Department of Interior “has done a good job of seeking public backing and moving ahead on programs for which local residents voice support.”

The current Department of Interior sullied itself when an internal memo was discovered about their plans to declare millions of acres a National Monument. They have no creditability left and until Salazar and his team are gone, they won’t. After what happened in Montana on January 17, 2001, many folks in Montana have serious concerns about any Democratic administration and their attempts at National Monument or Wilderness designation.

I am in favor of protecting our public lands to a point. Rehberg’s bill is a good start to ensure it is not forced down our throats. His bill requires all of Congress to approve a new National Monument or Wild Lands designation in Montana.

There are others ideas out there about the designation of public land – to give it a more local flavor: One idea is that any designation would have first have to be approved by the state’s two U.S. Senators, the Governor, and the Representative(s) whose district(s) is impacted. If anyone disagrees, then it cannot be designated. Some people believe that state legislatures should approve it and others want County Commissioners to have a say.

Nevertheless, Rehberg has brought this issue to the forefront and that’s a good thing. Let the debate (and political posturing) begin!

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Denny Rehberg, Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies today introduced an amendment to the Full Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011 to defund Obamacare.

“The House already passed legislation to repeal Obamacare, fulfilling the promise we made to the American people. Democrats in the Senate haven’t listened. They voted against the will of the people. But in this country, the power is with the People. So we’ll fight Obamacare in the courts. We’ll fight it in the state legislatures. We’ll fight it in the House. We’ll defund Obamacare one piece at a time. My amendment prevents funding from being used to implement Obamacare while we continue to work for a full legislative or judicial repeal.”

The amendment is one sentence long:

(Continuing Appropriations, 2011)

At that time, I wrote “Barack Obama is the President of the United States. He was born in Hawaii. Hawaii is a state. It was verified several times. It’s time to get over it.”

By the way, I did not vote for Barack Obama.

I’ve also mentioned several times about the three-ring circus that goes on in Helena every two years for 90 days. This session, it seems the clowns are out in force.

Last night I happened to catch a Tweet from CNN’s Anderson Cooper saying that he was interviewing Montana State Representative Wagner about his bill, so I decided to watch the interview on CNN forgoing a few minutes of one of my favorite television shows, Southland. It was a sacrifice.

Here’s the video:

You can make your own decisions about the interview, but for me I was embarrassed for Montana, and especially for our state legislature.

I am terrified to think what Wagner meant when he said that the election process has to be “pure.” His comments about both parents needing to be born in the United States to make their children natural-born citizens were interesting. Obama’s father was not a U.S. citizen. Supposedly six other Presidents, who were born in the United States, had one or more parents who were not born in the United States.

Note to those who watched the interview: Not all Montanans share the views of State Representative Wagner.

There are more important things to discuss in this state and in this country than a Birther bill. Things like creating jobs, controlling spending, and providing a strong education so our children can compete in the world are just a few things that come to mind.

It’s a shame that the leadership of the Montana House of Representatives have let their members stray so far from the real needs of the state.

By many accounts, it has been a rocky first week for Rehberg. It was impressive that Rehberg had signs and/or bumper stickers ready to go and his Senate Campaign website was launched the same evening as his announcement as was his Twitter feed @Rehberg2012. He is also on Facebook.

It seems from this casual observer’s view that it was all planned out perfectly, except for maybe the speeches and talking points.

Even before Rehberg came out of the gates, Tester and the Democrats tried to link him to Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (both are House Tea Party Caucus members) and her plan to cut Veterans funding – a plan that Bachmann rightfully ditched after hearing from Veterans. (See TWW column on that subject HERE)

Then on the night of his announcement Rehberg reportedly uttered, “President Bachmann, where are you? “That sounds alright, doesn’t it? That sounds pretty good.” Politico picked up the story HERE. It wasn’t long before the Democrats were sending that clip around the country and raising money off of it.

Maybe the Rehberg campaign consultants have polling that shows people saying “President Bachmann” plays well in Montana. I guess we’ll see. If you watch the video, some people laugh and then start applauding. Honestly, I cringed when I heard it.

Then last Monday, Rehberg spoke to the Montana Legislature and mentioned the gray wolf population and a federal judge in Montana saying, “When I first heard his decision, like many of you I wanted to take action immediately,” Rehberg said. “I asked: How can we put some of these judicial activists on the Endangered Species list?”

I wrote a few days later that “it’s a stretch to say Rehberg threatened a Federal judge” and listed the sentence in context with the rest of the subject. I still believe that, but Rehberg opened the door and now those words are a nice tool for the Democrats to use against him.

Even the children of the federal judge have chimed in with a powerful letter to the editor called, “Inflammatory words inflame” writing, “For all Montanans, and on behalf of our family, we ask Congressman Rehberg to remember that words matter, and inflammatory words inflame.”

The children also used the “T” word (as in Tucson) writing, “We, too, are still trying to figure out exactly how he thought it appropriate or responsible to make these comments, especially in light of recent events in Tucson.”

So after all this in just the first week, we’re still 21 months from the General Election and you can bet these issues won’t be going away anytime soon – at least if the Democrats have anything to do about it.

Fortunately for Rehberg this senate race is more of a marathon than a sprint, plus he has a very vulnerable first-term Senator as his opponent. But if you are a supporter of Jon Tester, you are probably feeling a little better this week than you did about 10 days ago.

The Billings Gazette has the story HERE.

I collect campaign signs and buttons; so I had to post a photo of this 1996 Senate campaign sign:

It should be an interesting race!

For those of you who don’t know what a PSC does (and actually care about it) here is what their website tells us: “…ensure that public utilities in Montana provide adequate service to customers at reasonable rates. In its decisions, the commission tries to balance the interests of ratepayers who are concerned about utility costs with the utilities’ need to have the opportunity to earn a fair rate of return on their investment.”

There are five commissioners elected from five districts across the state. They serve four year terms. The Chairman and Vice Chairman are elected by the Commissioners.

That’s “pretty cool.”

Coming into 2011, the PSC was bubbling over with anticipation as the GOP took control of the commission. The GOP controls the commission 3-2 over the Democrats. Previously, the Democrats controlled the PSC 4-1.

In what could be defined as having visions of sugar- plums dancing through his head, PSC District 2 Commissioner Brad Molnar (the only Republican when the PSC was 4-1 in Democratic control) seemed to have felt since he was the “senior” Republican that he would be anointed to the throne of Chairman.

Quicker than ESPN College Football analyst Lee Corso could say “not so fast, my friend” Republican Travis Kavulla from PSC District 1 presented Molnar with some sort of “chairman’s code of conduct” to sign before he would support him as Chairman. Kavulla was reported saying he had doubts about Molnar’s “temperament and leadership” in being the Chairman. That is where the fun began.

The Montana media attempted to cover the scrum.

Kavulla was right to do this. I spoke to a few friends around the state on Tuesday and they were happy Kavulla made this move. It was easily proven when Molnar went off on Kavulla saying since Kavulla was only 26 years old he could not tell him how to live his life. Molnar also used very salty language in a public setting – in front of a couple of reporters – and since it was a Republican saying something nasty, they reported it.

All this happened within the first 48 hours of the Commission going into session.

It was also reported that Commissioner Bill Gallagher (District 5) said he was not qualified to be Chairman on Monday. He must have done a cram session on Monday night. He accepted the Chairmanship on Tuesday.

And Molnar gets to be Vice Chairman – not quite at the top of throne but he can see it from there.

I imagine this little elbow throwing and shoving match is far from over.

May God bless you and your family this Christmas…