Right-wing group claims to represent "sunshine," just don't shine the light on them

by: Montana Cowgirl

Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 20:47:40 PM MST

Enter in 2009 the Montana Policy Institute: a group that keeps its backer veiled in secrecy.  Organized as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, the group is a thinly regulated entity that can engage in limited amounts of public organizing, but cannot advocate for or against candidates and is supposed to remain non-partisan.

It guards its secrecy as closely as possible and the group refuses to identify any of its donors or its out-of-state bankroller.  The group refuses to say, in fact, much about itself at all. Its website says it is a

"free market think tank focused on Montana issues and Montana solutions"

"make state and local government more transparent."

As long as you don't try to shine a light on their own financial backers: the group flatly refuses to disclose them. There's something highly suspect about a group that refuses to hold themselves to the very standards of openness, sunshine, and transparency they claim to champion.

Busted!

by: Jay Stevens

Mon Jun 29, 2009 at 19:52:54 PM MST

According to Adams' report, Unsworth found "substantial evidence" that "Montanans in Action" "violated the state's campaign finance reporting and disclosure laws by refusing to disclose the source of the $1.2 million the group spent on three ballot initiatives in 2006." Unsworth found "detailed connections" between Butcher's group and its 2006 campaign and Howie Rich's "Americans for Limited Government."

Not surprising if you followed Montana blogs that summer, when it was exposed that Howie Rich and the ALG were funding similar ballot initiatives across the country. (And, of course, Rich's own website eventually admitted its funding of the effort in Montana.) Montana's effort to put the initiatives on the ballot was marked by pervasive fraud from the paid signature gatherers shipped in from across the country, and the initiatives were thrown out, and an investigation into "Montanans In Action" was kicked off.

The result was this report.

Butcher's reaction? He said it was "nothing more than a political payback vendetta for stepping on the toes of big government by supporting term limits on Montana politicians."

Heh. Not entirely out of character for these *sshats. In short, apparently Mr. Butcher and his ilk believe they are above the law.

Dennis Unsworth:

The 2006 tactics suggest that the proponents of CI-97, CI-98, and I-154 may be more interested in seeking to invalidate campaign reporting laws that require public disclosure of the true source of money used to finance express campaign speech.

Sounds about right. Total contempt for the legal processes that comprise our democracy.

Right-Wing Ballot Initiative Backers Indicted for Fraud

by: Matt Singer

Fri Oct 12, 2007 at 13:53:24 PM MST

Trevis Butcher, the right-wing operative who fronted the initiatives here, is claiming to be a legitimate non-profit facing unfair scrutiny. Yeah, right -- more like systemic pattern of fraud and corruption all over the country.

Trevis Butcher cries "foul" over investigations into funding of 2006 initiatives

by: Jay Stevens

Thu Oct 04, 2007 at 12:08:21 PM MST

Remember, these initiatives and their zombie brethren sprung up all across the country and were funded by a single man - libertarian Howie Rich - through front organizations (like Butcher's), who hired professional signature gatherers to fill petitions. Only the process was marked by "pervasive fraud" -- the gatherers lied about the content in the petitions, and the initiatives were thrown out.

The report explains why Unsworth is investigating Butcher's group:

Montanans in Action was formed in early 2006 as a nonprofit group for "educational" and political purposes, Butcher said. Such groups don't have to reveal their supporters - unless they act as an independent political committee that primarily supplies money to political campaigns.

Unsworth said his investigation seeks to establish whether MIA is an independent political committee, which would make it subject to reporting who gave it the money routed to the campaigns of the three ballot measures.

Butcher and his attorneys have accused Unsworth of conducting a "politically motivated witch hunt," notes that Unsworth is "active in Democratic circles," and claims against the group are "wild accusations."

Only thing is, antipathy for Butcher and his methods are bipartisan. It was the terrible trio of initiatives that inspired Senate Bill 96, a bipartisan effort to curtail the kind of wild, mercenary signature gathering so pervasive under Butcher's organization. (SB 96 passed with overwhelming support, and was signed into law by Governor Schweitzer.) Meanwhile, Daddy Butcher's initiative reform bill - which would have punished the groups who brought action against Baby Butcher's bills and made it harder for initiatives to be thrown out - died in a Republican-majority House committee.

There's no doubt Butcher's activities were suspiciously in alignment with Howie Rich's. More than one investigative journalist tied the money here in Montana to Rich. And Rich himself admitted that he financially supported the efforts here to make the terrible trio of initiatives law.

Butcher has no case here, and should hand over the requested documents. Montana has a right to know who's sponsoring political activity in the state.

The Right to Anonymously Buy Elections

by: Matt Singer

Thu Nov 16, 2006 at 07:35:58 AM MST

Subpoenas issued by Unsworth's office are violating free-speech and free-association rights because they will force the group to reveal its political associations and strategies, the suit said.

It's hilarious that one of the three initiatives these folks sponsored was going after "activist" judges, because they clearly want an activist judge to rule in this case.