The House State Administration Committee on Wednesday approved House Bill 412, a bill sponsored by Rep. David Bedey, R-Hamilton, that expands an existing prohibition on the use of public time or resources for solicitation of political campaign support to apply to legislators and judges.
The current state law restricts such campaigning to individuals who are classified as a “public officer or public employee.”
After an 11-7 vote, the committee successfully passed the bill, and it will now proceed to the full House for further consideration.
During the bill’s hearing on Tuesday, Bedey testified and expressed his difficulty in reading statutes and observing the exemption of certain government officials. He emphasized that regardless of how individuals attain public office, all of them should be held to a high standard.
On Tuesday, Bedey stated that the primary goal of the bill is to prevent the usage of public funds in political campaigns.
Asked by Rep. Mike Yakawich, R-Billings, to cite specific examples justifying the proposal, Bedey pointed to instances in which lawmakers have used their official state letterhead to advocate for a particular candidate or a bond issue. He did not refer to any legislators by name.
“According to Bedey, I was told that legislators can do this, but if a county commissioner had done the same thing, they would have faced consequences.”
Last year, Sen. Theresa Manzella, R-Hamilton, wrote to campaign donors of a candidate Manzella opposed in a Ravalli County legislative primary, now-Rep. Wayne Rusk, R-Corvallis, on her Senate letterhead explaining her support for Rusk’s opponent, Alan Lackey. Her letter generated a letters-to-the-editor exchange in which former Republican lawmaker Ed Greef accused her of ethical impropriety.
Regardless of the means by which we entered public office, it is imperative that each one of us is held accountable to a rigorous set of expectations.
Rep. David Bedey, R-Hamilton
Manzella, in her own letter, wrote, “if I want to use my stationery and postage to write a personal letter expressing my support, that too, is my choice.”
Greef responded by stating that it is fortunate that the ethics statute does not apply to legislators, but he believes this loophole urgently needs to be addressed.
Bedey stated that his bill would collaborate with the current disciplinary avenues for the two additional categories it aims to include in the ethics statute, namely lawmakers and judges. According to the bill, misconduct by legislators would be forwarded to the ethics committee of either the House or Senate, while transgressions by judges would be handled by the Judicial Standards Commission. Any violations committed by other public officials or employees would be under the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Political Practices, who possesses the authority to refer cases to county attorneys at the local level.
Bruce Spencer, a lobbyist for the Montana Judges Association, attended the hearing on Tuesday to express his support for the proposal. He emphasized that the reason for his support is mainly because the proposal upholds the important role of the Judicial Standards Commission in assessing allegations of judicial misconduct.
A few legislators on the committee expressed worry that the updated law could potentially punish them for their usual interactions with constituents.
“Say I’m listening to you in one ear and reading my emails in another,” posed Rep. Ed Stafman, D-Bozeman, who voted against the bill Wednesday. “Somebody writes me and says, ‘This ballot initiative that’s coming, this candidate, I’ve got concerns,’ and I write back, while I’m here, as a legislator, and I say, ‘Yeah, you’re right, that’s a terrible ballot initiative or a terrible candidate.’ I’ve used public time, I’ve used the internet the state is providing for me. Would I be in violation?”
Bedey pointed out that Stafman’s hypothetical scenario addresses an existing challenge that officials, as per current statutes, already face and maneuver through. Additionally, he mentioned that he hasn’t come across any prosecutions related to this matter.
Bedey explained that when he encounters the term ‘solicitation,’ it gives him the impression of being actively involved in an activity with a political committee. He believes there is a clear difference between such engagement and casual conversations held with constituents.
However, Stafman expressed his dissatisfaction with that response on Wednesday. He acknowledged the bill’s purpose but would prefer if it excluded legislators to feel more at ease.
He expressed his opinion, saying, “Although our intentions are noble and the objectives commendable, I believe this entangles us in undesirable challenges. If it didn’t involve legislators, my perspective might be very different.”
Rep. Bob Phalen, R-Lindsay, asked Bedey Tuesday if his bill considered the use of polling on specific pieces of legislation by the Montana Judges Association, a flashpoint in a broader conflict last session between Republican lawmakers and the judiciary. Bedey said he didn’t think his bill addresses that issue, and that to the extent that polling was questionable, it should be examined by the Judicial Standards Commission.
He stated that the bill provides equal opportunities and is not specifically aimed at the judiciary or the Legislature. The main focus is on holding all public officials to the same standard.
