The Double Speak Petitioners

by: Matt Singer

Fri Apr 23, 2010 at 09:52:19 AM MST

"CI-105 would prohibit a tax that does not exist. It would embed that prohibition in Montana's state constitution," said MEA-MFT President Eric Feaver. "It is at root an anti-government measure."

CI-105 would constitutionally prohibit a real estate transfer tax. CI-105 could also potentially prevent local governments and public schools from using local impact fees to cover the costs of new subdivisions and student enrollment growth.

For the past several weeks, signature gatherers have stationed themselves in parking lots and public areas across the state, gathering signatures to qualify CI-105 for the November ballot. Commissioner of Political Practices Dennis Unsworth has reported receiving numerous complaints about fraud and deception.

"I have heard reports of paid signature gatherers who misrepresent what CI-105 is all about.  Apparently, they will say anything to get people to sign their petitions. Some signature gatherers are from out of state, which is against Montana state law," said Terry Minow, MEA-MFT Political Director.

And some signature gatherers have been reported to claim, fraudulently, that CI-105 abolishes the "inheritance tax," which, like the real estate transfer tax, does not exist in Montana.

I've heard from others that the initiative has been misrepresented to them by signature gatherers who don't really understand the issue they're working on.

Signature gathering fraud has a lively history in Montana sadly. The good news is that the courts stepped in last time and cracked down on this.

Based on the number of petitioners running around, the Realtors (or whoever their ultimate backers are) are spending a hell of a lot of money on this initiative. They might be learning a valuable lesson soon about the importance of hiring credible signature gatherers and running a professional operation if they want to take part in the initiative process.

Takings Initiative Backburnered

by: Matt Singer

Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 14:57:59 PM MST

For more details on how this initiative could have hosed the state to the tune of $5 billion, check out this blast from the past.

Chuck Deficit's Takings Initiative and Its Cost to Montana: $500 million or $5 billion?

by: Matt Singer

Tue Dec 15, 2009 at 15:38:18 PM MST

Near as I can tell, the initiative is very similar to 2006 effort that mobilized an amazing amount of dishonesty and fraud, eventually being thrown off the ballot.

Already, Montanans ought to be wary supporting this new version. The fiscal note headlines that the anticipated cost of the bill is $600 million over six years, but consider the reasoning that leads to that number and realize just how conservative it is. The Governor's Budget office used Washington State's estimates of a similar measure and Oregon's actually filed claims under the initiative to determine the price.

In Oregon, actual claims filed came to $19.8 billion (with a b). In Washington, estimated claims came to $8.15 billion. Adjusting the Oregon figure for population, the budget director says that a similar program in Montana would result in over $5 billion in claims. Adjusting the Washington figure, we still end up with over $1 billion in claims. So how do we end up with a dollar figure of just $600 million? The following sentence explains:

Using the comparison to the analysis done for the Washington initiative and taking into account the uncertainties that exist because of the differences between the Montana and Washington initiatives; a 50% discount has been applied to this analysis.

But let's think about this again, the adjustment in cost from Washington State is done based on the populations of Washington and Montana. It fails to adjust for the fact that the initiative language in Montana is actually broader than the initiative language in Washington. It also ignores the fact that Montana has a hell of a lot more land than Washington State. We may have fewer people, but I'm not sure we have significantly fewer assets in the state (would love to hear otherwise).

In other words, the anticipated $600 million price tag is an optimistic interpretation of an optimistic interpretation of an optimistic interpretation. The Governor's office appears to be bending over backwards here to avoid criticism of cooking the books for political purposes. That's all well and good, but Montanans need to be aware that this initiative could easily destroy Montana's fiscal situation -- something already seriously threatened by the economic slowdown.

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.

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.