Montana Main Street Blog

How the State Government Benefits from the Satterlee decision

State fiscal analysts and lawmakers have been waiting for the decision in Satterlee to come out because the state government's general fund would be on the hook for some of the tab. Since the decision would have required payouts to people covered under the Old Fund, the state would have had to pay up to $130 million to pay off the liability. That can erase a budget surplus in Montana pretty quick.

I bet most state lawmakers are happy they don't have to deal with that price tag. Small businesses are celebrating as well.

2009 Election Analysis and 2010 Preview for Montana

GOPers are celebrating and predicting 2010 gains while Dems are largely dismissing the results as unimportant losses based on local factors. I think it's somewhere in between.

As most Democrats point out, these elections aren't always the best indicators of what will happen a year from now. A year is a lifetime in politics. So much can happen with the economy (good and bad), the war on terror, and big issues like health care reform, cap-and-trade and card check. Plus, NJ Democratic Governor Corzine was damaged goods and the Creigh Deeds, the Viriginia Democratic candidate for governor, ran a weak campaign.

But that cannot explain away the decisive results of these two elections. Something was energizing the Republican base, which hasn't happened since 2004. In short, Republicans aren't necessarily inspired to vote for Republicans, but they are getting ticked off at what is happening in Washington. This discontent is translating into higher participation from the GOP base, while loyal Democrats are seemingly uninspired. If this continues, Democrats should be concerned about noticeable losses in 2010.

In Montana, without a big race (I predict Rehberg will do well again) to draw independent voters, the 2010 legislative races will be about which party can get more of their base to show up. In 1998, the last time the U.S. House race was the top race, Montana saw its lowest voter turnout ever. If the GOP base continues to have big concerns about national developments, that may bring more Republicans out to vote in legislative elections while Democrats may be more likely to stay at home.

The question remains, however, if the Republican base will continue to stay energized. Polls show that Republicans don't really even like their own GOP leaders, so gains will have to come from their distaste of the Democratic agenda. If the economy gets worse, that may get more independents out to vote. When it comes to swing voters, it's still the economy, stupid.

BREAKING NEWS: Montana Supreme Court Affirms Satterlee

Just received word that the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the Workers' Compensation Court in the Satterlee work comp case. This is the case where the plaintiffs were seeking to overturn a statute that prohibits the collection of work comp benefits after a worker is retired. This means that the statute is upheld, and Montana small businesses will not have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in new costs.

It was a 5-2 decision, with Justice Leaphart writing the majority opinion. Chief Justice McGrath, Justice Rice, Justice Cotter and Justice Warner signed on to his opinion. Justice Morris, joined by Justice Nelson, wrote the dissent which relied heavily on a Utah Supreme Court decision. Interesting.

The Montana Chamber wrote an amicus brief in this case laying out the huge cost Montana businesses would incur if the statute was overturned. This is a good day for Montana small businesses, which are already paying the 2nd highest premiums in the country.

To read the full opinion, click here: Download Satterlee Decision

Voting Fail

This Election Day image is brought to you courtesy of www.failblog.org:

Come back tomorrow for commentary on today's elections in MT, NY, NJ, and VA, and a 2010 Election preview.

Governor Finally Sees Work Comp as an Issue

Last week, the Governor's office asked the Montana State Fund to show more information on why work comp rates have doubled since 2000. His tone in the article is rather harsh to the State Fund without looking at the real reasons of increasing costs, including his own opposition to good work comp reform bills and his office's silence on bills that would have raised costs.

In the 2009 Legislative Session, small businesses asked for clarity in the work comp laws regarding issues of course and scope. The bill, SB 371, would have dealt with an area of work comp that has allowed non-work related injuries into the system, thereby driving up costs for Montana businesses. The bill received big bi-partisan support from both houses, but the Governor vetoed the bill. I hope this new concern about work comp rates gets him to reconsider his position on course and scope for the next session. We'll definitely be bringing that one back.  

In other work comp areas, the Governor's office stood silent on legislation that would have raised the cost of work comp rates. The Governor's office is not one to shy away from lobbying on bills in committee, so the lack of any testimony from any executive departments on these bills was interesting. For example, SB 285 would have encouraged more attorney involvement in work comp cases by allowing attorney fee awards in cases where denial of benefits was perfectly reasonable. This would have certainly added cost to work comp costs, but no one from his office opposed the bill.

To be fair, the Governor did start a good council a few years ago to study the cost-drivers in work comp and to build consensus for good reforms. He should probably read some of their findings about medical costs, injury rates and return-to-work problems to find out more about why our rates are the 2nd highest in the country. But when good reforms come his way, he should also really jump on board. Glad to hear he is (hopefully) thinking about reversing his positions on some of these issues.

Climate Change Links

Although health care reform is still #1 in Washington, climate change legislation is lurking in the shadows ready to move at a moment's notice. Here are a few good links you should check out on this important topic:

Senator Baucus expresses his concerns about a proposed cap-and-trade bill

Dr. Steve Running of the new University of Montana's program on Climate Change made some interesting show on the "Voices of Montana" radio show last week. Those comments were picked up by the Sean Hannity Show (go 1:45 into the video to see the clip). BTW, you need to check out "Voices of Montana" every morning at 9:00 a.m. on Northern Broadcasting. Great show.

The effects of climate change legislation on Montana: Download ALEC MT INFO_Waxman Markey  

Chamber to Host Campaign Schools

Every election year the Montana Chamber teams up with the Montana Electric Cooperative Association and the Montana Credit Union Network to host a series of non-partisan campaign schools around the state. We are still getting some of the details worked out, but we have some dates and locations set:

January 26th - Great Falls @ the Montana Electric Cooperative Association Headquarters

January 27th - Missoula @ the Hilton Garden Inn

January 28th - Bozeman @ the Hilton Garden Inn

January 29th - Billings @ the Hilton Garden Inn

If you are thinking about running for office (local, legislative or statewide), if you think you may run for office some day, or even if you plan on volunteering on someone's campaign, this school is a great place to learn about the fundamental elements of a successful campaign. Topics covered include development of a plan, media/communications, fundraising, following campaign laws, getting out the vote and more.

For more information on the schools, contact Sharon at sharonm@mtco-ops.com.

"Not Evil, Just Wrong" Schedule for Montana

A new movie is bound to stir the climate change pot even further as the U.S. Senate prepares to take up cap-and-trade legislation after health care reform. "Not Evil, Just Wrong" is a response to Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth," and it sets out to shine some light on the devastating economic impacts of cap-and-trade schemes. The legislation will hurt American jobs, American pocketbooks, but not have any real impact on our climate.

If you're interested in viewing the film, here is a list of locations around the state. Check it out and feel free to post your review of the movie on this blog.

City	Location	Time
Missoula	UM - UC Theater	Sun, 6:00 PM
Billings	MSU- Billings, Petro Theater	Sun, 6:00 PM
Bozeman	MSU - SUB Ballroom	Sun, 6:00 PM
Helena	Carroll College Simperman Hall Room 101/202	Sun, 6:00 PM
Glendive	Dawson County Public Library	Sun, 7:00 PM
Kalispell	Outlaw Hotel	Sun, 6:00 PM
Polson	Polson City Library	Sun, 7:00 PM
Dillon	UM Western - Student Union	Wed, 21st 7:00

 

 

Campaign for Free Enterprise

As I've noted numerous times before, we are a separate organization from the U.S. Chamber, just like the local chambers work on their own. But we often team up on important issues for all businesses, large and small. The U.S. Chamber has started a new campaign to emphasize the unique role free enterprise has played and will play (hopefully) in the years where we get America's economy back on track.

Here is a taste of the Campaign for Free Enterprise:
 

 

 

CO Reduces Minimum Wage, Montana's Stays the Same

Like Montana, Colorado ties it's minimum wage to the CPI-U, a price index of consumer products calculated by the federal government. The CPI-U uses data from all over the country, but it doesn't use any data from Montana, Wyoming, and the two Dakotas. But that's another story.

Colorado's state minimum wage law actually provides for a decrease (not to go below the federal minimum wage) in it's minimum wage if there is a decrease in the CPI-U. This year, the index fell 0.6 percent due to a drop in energy prices. Therefore, the state minimum wage will drop a monsterous 3 cents, fron $7.28 to $7.25.

Montana's state minimum wage will not decrease, despite the drop in the CPI-U. Not only does our law not allow for a decrease in the wage, but it also sets it at the higher rate of the two wages - federal and state. Since Montana currently has its wage at $7.25, which is the federal rate, it wouldn't go lower even with a state provision for a decrease tied to the CPI-U.

So what do you think - should Montana's law allow for a decrease or not?