Montana Supreme Court Justice Mike Wheat filed his first campaign finance report yesterday, raising nearly $40,000 since he filed for election just over one month ago.
"The support and encouragement I've received this past month is very humbling," said Wheat. "It's gratifying that so many Montanans have stepped up and provided their support to help me retain a seat on the Court," he added.
Wheat, 62, was appointed by Governor Schweitzer to fill a vacancy on the court left by former justice John Warner, who retired at the end of last year. Wheat was one of 11 candidates for the appointment, and one of only three whose name was forwarded to the Governor by the Montana Judicial Nominating Commission. By law, Wheat must run to keep the seat in the very next election and again when the term expires in 2014. So far, no one has filed to challenge him.
"I've been blessed with a beautiful family and fulfilling career and I've always tried to give back to my country and community through public service," he said. "Serving the people of Montana on the high court is a responsibility I cherish and do not take lightly." Wheat emphasized that "our judicial system is vital to our constitutional democracy."
Wheat began his legal career as a criminal prosecutor before entering private practice. For 28 years he was a partner in the Bozeman firm of Cok, Wheat & Kinzler. Wheat is a former State Senator where he served as Chair of the Judiciary Committee and a Vietnam Marine Corps combat veteran. He and his wife, Debby, have four children with a son currently in high school.
I'm still catching up on the news over the holidays, and I just saw this news:
Gov. Brian Schweitzer is picking a Bozeman lawyer and former state senator to fill a vacancy on the Montana Supreme Court.
Schweitzer announced the selection of Mike Wheat on Wednesday. Current Supreme Court Justice John Warner is retiring at the end of the year.
Wheat is an excellent choice for the position. During the state attorney general's race, I got a chance to sit down with Mike for nearly an hour and pick his brain, and I found an incredibly principled lawyer deeply committed to the law and to the state of Montana.
Wheat was George Ochenski's pick for attorney general, and you can read his thoughts on Mike's candidacy and stance on the death penalty in a pre-primary election column.
Jodi Rave has a quick writeup of possible US Attorney candidates for Montana. Senator Baucus forwarded three names to the Obama administration for consideration, and two people have confirmed they were interviewed: Helena's Mike Cotter and Bozeman's Mike Wheat.
Wheat, for one, is an excellent nominee for the position. New readers to the website might like to revisit the then candidate's interview with Left in the West for a taste of the man's beliefs. Also check out George Ochenski's endorsement of Wheat for the state Attorney General job.
Wheat's no-nonsense persona, his professionalism, his integrity, and his rock-solid devotion to the law makes him perfect for the US Attorney's job.
Good luck, Mike.
I'm curious who the third name is. Anyone have a guess or has heard a rumor?
Let me make it clear from the outset that any of the three Democratic contenders for Attorney General would undoubtedly do a great job. Bullock has been an assistant AG and has worked on the stream access issues that are near and dear to Montanans' hearts. Parker paid his dues in the horrendous last legislative session, battling headstrong Republicans through a vicious 90 days of party-line votes and ugly debate. Both men are young, smart and ambitious, so Montana can't really lose if either one of them winds up in the AG's office.
Those are pretty fair statements about Bullock and Parker coming from someone endorsing their opponent.
Ochenski's words on why Wheat:
Winnowing the chaff from the wheat, so to speak, isn't easy, but the reason Mike Wheat stands out is, simply put, his compassion. [...] Wheat, like Parker, was a county prosecutor in Butte many years back. But unlike Parker, his focus is not about what a tough prosecutor he's going to be-in fact, of the three candidates, Wheat is the only one who personally opposes the death penalty. In a recent interview on the blog Left in the West, (which has great interviews of all three candidates), [Hey, look, Jay -- we're famous!] Wheat put it this way: "We cannot, in our constitutional jurisprudence system, guarantee that the people we're killing for crimes actually committed the crime. And so, to me, it's very simple. If you can't guarantee that, then you're denying the constitutional rights to people who may be innocent."
That's also a great summation of one of the best arguments for backing Mike Wheat.
I think it is also tough to overstate the value of this in the race. Most papers won't endorse. The Independent gets pretty broad distribution in a big ol' Democratic stronghold. This could easily move a few thousand votes in a comparatively low-information race.
(AG candidates talk DNA evidence on video at a forum - promoted by Matt Singer)
Here's the first of some video footage taken last night at the Missoula County Democrats' Central Committee meeting- this one is a question about DNA evidence and whether a full investigation should be made into all criminal convictions- similar to legislation in Illinois. All three answer the question(s)-
IF ANYONE HAS SUGGESTIONS FOR BETTER TAGS, etc., GIVE A SHOUT OUT- fair and positive- Angela
UPDATED- here's a link to a story about the AG's race in this week's Missoula Independent- http://www.missoulanews.com/in... entitled, "Ochenski
Daily dose of compassion: Punitive attorney generals are a bust"
I think it's great that we've got some lively discussions going on here around the Attorney General's race. Jay is set to interview John Parker today and will hopefully get that interview and transcript posted soon. Once that happens, I'll tinker with some way to have both the longer interviews and the endorsement posts located prominently on the site for the time leading up to the primary.
But let me also say this -- every once in a while, I read a comment from one or another candidate's backer that reminds me too much of the weird crap from the Presidential race. Frankly, all three of the Democratic candidates are extremely good candidates. Extremely good. Like extremely good to the point that the Democratic Party should be excited if even just one of the three had filed.
So we've got a wealth of riches.
And, unfortunately, I think a lot of voters are just now tuning into the race. So for supporters out there, here's my advice: stay positive. Let people know what's good about your own candidate. Especially in a three way race, when I see candidate X (or X's supporters) knocking candidate Y over something silly, I just become more inclined to either support candidate Y or Z.
Now, I've already cast my ballot (for Ron Paul, Bob Kelleher, and Tim Fox), but I don't think I'm alone in this sentiment.
This is also why I think this whole write up endorsement posts and get them promoted to the frontpage is cool, we won't be extending a similar offer to write up anti-endorsements and get them promoted to the frontpage.
One last thought -- there are also contested primaries for Governor, Superintendent, and a number of legislative races. Anyone want to take a side and make their case? Post away -- we'll give you the space.
(Here's a post arguing for Mike Wheat as Montana AG. Please don't misconstrue this as an endorsement from LiTW; also, if you support another AG candidate and want to make a plea in his favor, feel free to post a diary as well.
Don't forget to check out the interviews with Steve Bullock and Mike Wheat. I'll be interviwing John Parker tomorrow... - promoted by Jay Stevens)
The interview of Mike Wheat by Jay Stevens was much appreciated as well as the other interviews.
I've known Mike Wheat for 8 years. Mike is a warm and personable guy. Having visited with him many times, I've observed that he likes to listen to people, likes to hear what they have to say and what their concerns are. He's a good listener. He has a wry sense of humor, and he has a great deal of empathy for the people of Montana who work hard to provide for their families.
I would like to know of the other Democratic candidates running to be Montana's next Attorney General: how will you beat Republican Tim Fox, the presumptive Republican winner based on the amount of money he's raised, in the November Primary
It has already been noted that the national Republican Party has targeted the Montana Attorney General's race as one in which they think they can win, and will pour in big money to do so. I don't think that John Parker or Steve Bullock can beat Tim Fox.
Mike has proven that he can beat a Republican challenger in a conservative district. He ran against Jack Wells in a conservative Senate District in Gallatin County in 2002 and beat him 52 to 48 percent.
Mike has worked his entire professional career in Montana. However, Steve Bullock worked at the international law firm of Steptoe & Johnson, based in Washington DC. Look at Steptoe & Johnson's clients on their website (http://www.steptoe.com/). This firm represents clients from the following sectors: "Aerospace & Defense", "Energy", "Food & Agriculture", "Insurance", "Manufacturing", "Natural Resources" (Mining & Extracting and Petroleum Refining & Marketing), "Real Estate", "Trade Associations", and so on and so on. The Natural Resources representation really bothers me.
These types of interests are on the other side of the fence, the side that an attorney general is usually suing, on behalf of Montanans.
All three candidates seem decent. But Mike Wheat has spent his life in Montana representing individuals...people who have been harmed by another individual, by an employer, or by a corporation. And because of this, I have full confidence that he will represent and protect all Montanans against those interests who may not have our own best interest at heart.
As promised, here's the interview with Democratic state attorney general candidate, Mike Wheat.
Again, all of the sound quality problems, ambient noise, and other assorted mischief is directly attributable to my amateurishness and should be held against the candidate in no way. Actually, kudos to Steve and Mike and the others (yes, there will be more) for daring to step up and do this without knowing what they were in for...
Again, and as always, for more information on Mike and his candidacy, check out his website, or drop a coin into his piggybank at his Actblue page.
Yes, more interviews are coming. I've got one with OPI Sam Kitzenberg in the can, and am trying to schedule something with the third Democratic AG candidate, John Parker. Keep it tuned right here...
Finally, we're about to see John Parker enter the fold. The Attorney General race has a bit more momentum and money than some of the other Montana races, but it's still fascinating watching this.
Maybe they'll start writing diaries and giving the community a chance to ask questions soon. That'd be cool.
Sorry for the unannounced absence. I went on vacation -- was in an undisclosed locale with temperatures over 90. Coming back to Missoula was a bit of a surprise -- but it is great to see snow.
Interesting stuff happening here. Like many others, I was sorry to hear about Bill Kennedy's apparent health troubles. I don't know anything more than what I've read -- and that includes for potential new candidates in that race. I don't even know if the candidates being talked about are seriously considering it. So no real news on that front.
But there's something else going on in Montana politics that seems worth discussing. That's the GOP caucuses. So far they haven't been getting much mention. That's too bad.
That said, I was talking to a Republican today who is eligible to caucus who said she got an ID phone call from the Romney campaign (she's not a Romney supporter). She also indicated that in her neck of the woods, Ron Paul supporters are lining up to fill empty seats on the central committee and be able to caucus for their guy.
Now, I have no idea how many vacancies GOP central committees had statewide prior to this process. I do know that one of the big strengths of the caucus process was the likelihood of campaigns doing a lot of the legwork to build GOP grassroots in Montana.
So here's the question: is anyone other than Romney and Paul working in Montana (noting that Steve Daines is apparently helping Huckabee, for what that's worth)?
And is anyone other than Ron Paul supporters lining up to join central committees?
And, can Ron Paul supporters gain sufficient numbers to be a real force in the caucus?
And, will Ron Paul supporters stick around in the GOP even if/when their candidate loses?
Dean's grassroots operation from 2004 embedded itself pretty firmly inside the Democratic and progressive establishments. A lot of my cohorts from back in the day are now working at the DNC for the big candidates or whatever. Others, like me, went into the less partisan, but still ideological, world.
The question is what Paul's supporters will do after this. Stay in the GOP? Move to the Libertarian Party? Start a significant national PAC a la Democracy for America to impact conservatism in general?
Brian Schweitzer has over $500,000 in the bank and over $600,000 raised (he raised about $1.5m in his successful '04 race). That's an intimidating number for potential opponents (and that's a great argument for clean election public financing alternatives). Back of the envelope calculations reveal that about .8% of the voters in the state have now contributed to his re-election campaign. By Election Day, expect that to be a much higher figure at his fundraising clip.
Steve Bullock's fundraising has continued at a monster clip, with his total being $77,500 and change raised ($12k online, good enough to make a top 10 list of state candidates on ActBlue). He's banked $65k of that. Mike Wheat is only down by about $500, but nearly half his money is self-financed. John Parker of Great Falls got a later start, but my understanding is he raised close to $30,000 this quarter (his numbers weren't available yesterday) -- an impressive showing. Meanwhile, the two Republicans running for AG are sitting about about $2k raised each. They both got a much later start, but are clearly behind in the money chase.
Monica Lindeen has $20k in the bank for her Auditor race -- formidable for this early with no opponent. Brad Johnson, by comparison, has $15k banked for his as yet uncontested re-election campaign for Secretary of State.
Denise Juneau has nearly $15k in the bank in her OPI bid. Holly Raser has raised a bit over $2k.
Democrats shot out of the gates faster and are raising far more money. Indication of things to come?
I already knew this, but forgot to post it -- Mike Wheat's website is live. Wheat was the first candidate out of the chute for Attorney General. In a formidable field, Mike Wheat is a formidable candidate. I can't find anyone who has a bad thing to say about him (that he didn't run for re-election is as harsh as it gets; and when the biggest complaint of a public servant is that they aren't running again, well, you get the idea).
MT House Approves 02/05 Primary. If this measure gets a similar share of votes in the Montana Senate, it'll become law. February 5th is looking more and more like it'll be a national primary, at least for Democrats. I think California, Illinois, and a bunch of smaller states (including most of the Rocky Mountain West) will all vote that day. So Montana won't have a big voice, but it'll be bigger than our current primary -- held in early June -- affords us now. More importantly? Montana Voters will be participating early enough that they'll feel more empowered -- since their votes will actually impact the process (even if only slightly).
Mike Wheat is officially in the AG race.Full Gazette story. His website should be live soon. Story also mentions Steve Bullock and John Parker as sure bets to run. All three of 'em are good candidates and would be a good fit for the position. This will be one of the most interesting primaries in Montana next year, especially for the Democrats (since our top of the ticket is basically guaranteed to be a lock).
Voter fraud continues to be mythical. MSU Prof Jerry Calvert notes the use of fraud as an excuse by opponents of Election Day Registration -- and then notes the utter lack of evidence that any fraud occured. That is completely unsurprising. As two national election experts write today in the Washington Post, "Proven voter fraud, statistically, happens about as often as death by lightning strike." This won't end the grousing on the right, no doubt. But it's relevant, especially because people continue to use this canard to attack voting rights for eligible Americans.
