The biggest election fight you’re missing
C.B. Pearson and the group, "Stand With Montanans," are pushing to keep the state's campaign finance laws as others fight just as hard against them.
October 12th, 2012
10:00 AM ET

The biggest election fight you’re missing

By Lisa Desjardins, CNN

Missoula, Montana (CNN) -– As the nation wrestles over who will occupy the White House for the next four years, Montana is in the midst of a fierce battle over 100 years worth of campaign finance law. And what happens in the Treasure State could set the tone for the future of campaign funding around the country.

On Election Day, voters in Montana will decide on a ballot initiative that would direct each of their elected officials to push for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The amendment would allow states to ban corporate funding of campaigns and set sharp limits on the money individuals can donate to candidates.

It is a test of government control over campaign spending versus corporate influence over candidates.

For a century, Montana has had some of the toughest limits on campaign funding in the country. That has its origins in the 19th century when copper barons openly bought politicians and ran mining operations that left pollution and scars across the state. Outcries led to sweeping reform, including a ban on corporations funding campaigns in the state.

That ban was overturned 100 years later, in June, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Montana’s law limited free speech rights of corporations, pointing to the court’s earlier decision in Citizens United.

Now a group called “Stand with Montanans” fears that, without a Constitutional amendment, well-heeled mining corporations can again take over the state’s government.

CB Pearson, treasurer for Stand with Montanans:

[4:24] “We're never going to be able to compete in that arena with the corporations. They have so much money, they can buy political outcomes in elections like they buy lumber or they buy other sorts of merchandise.”

On the other side, an advocacy group named the American Tradition Partnership, is campaigning against the ballot initiative and has launched sweeping lawsuits against most of Montana’s campaign finance laws. The group lists its mission as fighting “extreme environmentalists” and pushing for natural resource development. But it does not disclose its sponsors.

Jim Brown, attorney for American Tradition Partnership:

[5:52] “The assertion that people are trying to buy elections or buy politicians is absurd. As American citizens we retain the right to case our ballots for who we want. No corporation or third-party group can control who we vote for.”

Listen to our story for more on the American Tradition Partnership and its arguments as well as the potential environmental fears of their opponents.

soundoff (71 Responses)
  1. edofchattanoogatn

    Ya know, folks; anyone who would vote for that sack of feces, mitt romney and paul "GILLIGAN" ryan is simply ignorant. Debate or not, I just do not see the sloth mitt romney and his Gilligan's Island, first mate, in the White House. That would be worse than george walker bush back in the White House.

    A sorry, self righteous, corrupt, lying, hypocritical and bigoted republiCON will say anything, do anything and stoop to ANY LOW to get their way. The life-long dream of this den of vipers (known as the gop), is to make ONLY TWO classes of US citizens; THE VERY RICH and THE VERY POOR. Then the very rich will then make slaves out of the very poor, having them do the "dirty work' that they do not want to do. That is why republiCONS want Mexicans to come to the USA; it is because they will do jobs that American republiCONS do not want to do (like shovel feces from a barn).

    These sorry lying republiCONS WILL NOT REST until they achieve this goal. They have been working on this dream since the mid 1800's when slavery was abolished. Why do you think the entire civil war rebel states are republiCON states ??? Makes you think doesn't it ???

    Also, the sloth republiCON, mitt romney, is a member of the mormon CULT !!! Read about the founder of the mormon cult, the corrupt joseph smith, sometime when you have time to waste. This sorry satanic angel had a kinky sexual affair WITH A 14 YEAR OLD GIRL and made her quite pregnant, while still married to his first wife. This made him a PEDOPHILE and an ADULTERER !!! He was also SHOT IN THE HEAD, trying to escape an anti-polygamist raid on his mormon CULT compound in the late 1800's by the local law enforcement !!! This made him a POLYGAMIST !!!

    The sloth mitt romney and his sorry "gilligan" first mate (all needed is the sailor's hat) are bound and determined to JOIN CHURCH AND STATE INTO UNHOLY MATRIMONY !!! They want this to enable the elimination (the kill off) of all the Gay Community and anyone else their self righteous selves want to get rid of. Just last week I read an article about the slime ball, george fuqua (arkansas republiCON government stench), who said he believed in LETHAL INJECTION FOR UNRULY CHILDREN !!! Can you believe that ??? Also, a lot of the ignorant republiCON followers, truly believe that romney will change the ABORTION LAWS....HAHAHAHAHA (I can't stop laughing)...LOLOLOL !!! The republiCONS have had a president and full majority in senate and in the house MANY TIMES and ABORTION is still the same as it was when it was made legal many years ago !!! RepubliCONS are LIARS and corrupt evil angels of SATAN HIMSELF !!! This is the kind of world the self righteous, lying, religious zealot, republiCONS want to make for us; a world where the CHURCH RULES !!!

    IS THIS THE KIND OF LIFE YOU WANT TO LIVE IN AMERICA ????? I say NO to self righteous corruption like this !!!



    October 15, 2012 at 8:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Steven Jones

      You are a bigoted, illiterate, racist hate monger.

      October 15, 2012 at 9:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cowboy Bob

      Just a Bunch of "SOCIALIST GARBAGE".....

      You'd be much Happier living in Europe but also much poorer but then again you can join all those with their "Hands Out"...
      Give Me Capitalism & Freedom any day of the week....

      October 16, 2012 at 8:18 am | Report abuse |
  2. Average_Casey

    Please take this a step further and pass wholesale campaign finance reform please. Dissallow all campaign contributions from everyone and limit PACs as well. The whole thing has gotten out of control. If they were to keep people from conitributing to politicians' campaigns, the legislature would probably get stuff accomplished and eliminate all of the crap we hate. This would make our country stronger, where politicians were required to appease their constituents instead of playcating those who contribute the most to their campaign.

    October 15, 2012 at 7:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Cowboy Bob

      NONE of this will work unless All The UNIONS are also included in this Reform.....
      But I'll betcha all those in favor of pushing this type of Campaign Finance reform want the UNIONS exempted in order for it to Favor the Democrats 'BIG TIME'...
      Hopefully people will see this for what it is & won't play the "FOOL" to the Democrats again...
      It's a POWER GRAB plain and simple...

      October 16, 2012 at 8:24 am | Report abuse |
  3. nospam2

    I see a couple problems with this:

    Will they also ban unions?

    What about super pacs?

    If you only allow funding through the traditional parties, how are you ever going to get a decent candidate?

    Frankly, we need at the very least a threat of a 3rd party to get the Democrats and Republicans to start working for the people and not themselves.

    October 15, 2012 at 6:31 pm | Report abuse |
  4. david saint

    private prisons have the AZ legislature under its thumb...heck they got them to steal half the the homeowner funds for AZ and give it to them AND eliminate the law meant to ensure what they were given was good for tax payers! Now its going to cost tax payers in AZ 10 million dollars EXTRA a year to fund these things we dont even need! Greedy corporations, the Cancer that is killing America!

    October 15, 2012 at 6:16 pm | Report abuse |
  5. david saint

    LMAO for that guy to say corporations arent buying elections, makes me wonder what he smokes when he gets up in the morning.

    October 15, 2012 at 6:14 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Duane Allen

    I like do like Aaron's idea of EQUAL speech... another idea would be to have ONLY publicly financed campaigns with a prohibition of any outside money. The best way, or the easiest way to facilitate a publicly financed system would be an expansion or a modification of the current option (which is a check box on your tax return) that increases the contribution amount to say... $10 or $20, and like the current provision does NOT reduce the amount of your tax refund. Insofar as we all have a bonafide stake in our democratic society and an inferred interest in assuring same into perpetuity it would pose no burden on most anyone and give a voice to those who may not have financial resources to run for elected office.

    October 15, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Betty

    Thank you Montana!!

    October 15, 2012 at 3:24 pm | Report abuse |
  8. Does government create jobs? Ask a Fireman, Policeman, Librarian, Teacher...

    I remember hearing the court ruling on this subject. It took place in the same week as Affordable Care Act and Arizona's Immigration laws were decided by the court. I thought it was a big blow to the "real" people of this country that corporations could (and do) spend unlimited amounts of money on elections. Buying up politicians, funding Super PACs, and even threatening their employees to vote this/that way "or else" is simply outrageous. It boggles my mind why "real" people would allow this in the country that they inherited, that they will pass on to the next generation.
    Why would it be OK for money to equal "voice?" So if I earn $50K per year, but my neighbor earns double that, that entitles him/her to have twice as much "voice" as me? And that scenario can be swapped: another neighbor earning $25K per year has half the "voice" I have? Seniors living off of retirement and SS may earn a whopping $10K, entitling them to 1/5 of my voice. This just isn't right.
    And what about this: we all had to wait to turn 18 (or 21) to vote and gain countless other rights as citizens. How old do corporations have to be in order to benefit this way? I would imagine, the same day of incorporation, right?
    Montana, go get 'em!!! Inspire the rest of the country and our elected representation to hear what "real" people have to say about the subject.

    October 15, 2012 at 2:53 pm | Report abuse |
  9. saywhat

    Montana is a throw-away state with almost no population and therefore almost no electoral votes.

    October 15, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • saywhat

      please ignore my previous comment. I based it off the headline and then realized what the article was really about..

      October 15, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • nnaiden

      Excuse me? I live in Montana. Lots of people live in Montana. A throw-away state? I don't consider any state a throw away state. And we a strong history of some very democratic traditions, including restricting campaign financing, because we've been there with corporations...like a hundred years ago. What an attitude you have! So is Alaska a throw away state too? Awfully big to toss if you ask me.

      October 15, 2012 at 7:08 pm | Report abuse |
      • mattokc

        couldnt agree more!! No state is a throw away state, each vote counts. Even mine in Oklahoma "yes a registered democrat, we do exist in oklahoma".

        October 16, 2012 at 11:11 am | Report abuse |
  10. brian

    I like how most on the left scream about corporations giving money but fail to say anything about Unions giving money. Just look at what has happened to California, not caused by coprate money.

    October 15, 2012 at 2:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bob

      I like how the right whines about unions or anything that allows individuals a chance against multi-billion dollar corporations who essentially buy government votes. Funny you mention California. There is a ballot measure called Prop 32 that says it is "Campaign Finance Reform" and disallows unions from any sort of lobbying or political commercials. It specifically does not affect SuperPACs, oil companies, Big Tobacco, banks, investment companies. Guess who is sponsoring the bill? SuperPACs, oil companies, big tobacco, etc.
      Unions are the only thing that allow Joe Average a chance to be heard of the millions of dollars big companies throw at politicians. Look who the GOP has demonized this election: teachers, scientists, blue collar workers (with their pesky unions), civil servants, immigrants, veterans. These are the people that actually built America. But to the GOP they scum, lazy, losers. At the same time they want to remove laws that keep an eye on banks, Wall Street, big oil, fracking companies like Haliburton (Who needs clean drinking water? Just buy bottled.). Remember the GOP wanted to apologize to BP (for the citizens of the gulf getting all their seafood into BP's nice clean oil). They want foreign companies to be able to spend anonymously to buy elections (but unions shouldn't be allowed to put out a single tv ad). And of course this comes all from Fox News- the only 100% foreign-owned broadcaster in the U.S. So every time a "patriot" repeats some term (like "Communism") that he heard but doesn't understand, I die a little. The guy probably belongs to that astroturf Tea Party (100% invent by Fox and billionaire industrialists) without knowing he is doing the work of a Saudi Royal Prince whose only goal in life is to get the U.S. to take Saudi Arabia's oil competitor. Let's see, Iraq has been set back a decade in oil production, now their next target is Iran. Gee, ever wonder why Fox is constantly talking about going to war with Iran? Or why they still perpetuate the myth about WMDs in Iraq even after Bush admitted there were none? But, hey, you're a "patriot" right? You only do what a Saudi-owned fake news station and it's invented political party tell you to do. That sure sounds like a "free-thinking" American.

      October 15, 2012 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse |
      • GOP=Madness

        Bingo! A better explanation I have never found, Bravo.

        October 15, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Report abuse |
      • Betty

        Thanks Bob, you said it in a nutshell...

        October 15, 2012 at 3:22 pm | Report abuse |
      • Gloria

        I have 5 teachers in my family and none of them are Democrats. So where does that leave them? Forced to pay union dues to support political views they don't agree with.

        October 15, 2012 at 6:54 pm | Report abuse |
        • Ziig

          So how do your teacher relatives like the Republican party's constant bashing of their profession and insistence that teacher's are part-time hacks sucking the teats of big government? Completely absurd that a teacher would be a republican.

          October 15, 2012 at 7:52 pm | Report abuse |
  11. turby

    On the surface we should all agree to ban corporate money from influencing elections. The analogy that guns don;t kill people, people kill people. If people vote to have corporations be the rule of law, its because people so decided. Again, we can't purify the heart of man – it is evil from its foundation. So when we vote we tell all of who and what we desire.

    October 15, 2012 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
    • saywhat

      "So when we vote we tell all of who and what we desire." No we don't. We only choose a candidate and they are the ones we hope will reflect 'all of who and what we desire' is reflected in their actions while in congress.

      October 15, 2012 at 2:35 pm | Report abuse |
  12. onlymho

    when sending this link to PA representatives and senators I expanded the suggestion as follows . . .

    ALL organizations (i.e. any non individual / citizen) should be prohibited from contributing to political entity or at least limited to the same limit to be applied as follows. Individuals should have a reasonable dollar limit imposed per any donation to a political entity. (even then some will no doubt find a way to cheat in order to obtain undue influence but this is a good start)

    Organizations should be able to coordinate and solicit donations from like minded citizens to provide combined support to political entities – still maintaining a reasonable dollar limit per contributing individual.

    Only then can we return to a more fair representation of the people, for the people, and by the people.

    Thank you Montana!

    October 15, 2012 at 2:12 pm | Report abuse |
  13. AzLib

    You'll note that the ruling for citizens united did not require Truth... There was a time not that many years ago about equal time on public airwaves. This equal time insured that both sides of subject were presented to voters so that they could make up their minds. This is now gone... Next corporations which cannot be drafted, do not say the pledge, cannot be tossed in Jail, are not human somehow have equal speech rights and worse that money is in fact speech. God Bless the people in Mt for attempting to correct this wrong... Won't happen, but God Bless them for trying. The republican wrecking crew will never allow this action to happen.

    October 15, 2012 at 1:43 pm | Report abuse |
  14. onlymho

    ALL organizations (ie any non individual citizen) should be prohibited from contributing to political entity. And individuals should have a reasonable dollar limit imposed per any political entity. Only then can we return to a fair representaion of the people, for the people, and by the people. Thank you Montana!

    October 15, 2012 at 1:05 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Aaron

    Very nice audio article.

    I have an idea. Let us not limit free speech. But the problem that we are trying to address is facilitating EQUAL speech. The problem with corporations and super PACs is that they have the money to flood the airwaves with their speech/point-of-view, where as the party with opposing interest doesn't.

    If I had the power, I would modify the legislation to say that if a corporation or any person has the money to fill the airwaves with their point of view, and if there is any other person or a group that has an opposing view and this group/person can prove that he/it doesn't have the money to promote that view, the corporation with money, has to provide the opposing party an equal amount of money to promote the opposing view as well. That way, there is EQUAL voice on both sides and the people can now decide which one they want to choose.

    October 15, 2012 at 1:02 pm | Report abuse |
  16. Vegabern

    Here's one Monana vote for limits on campaign spending. There's enough corruption in politics already.

    October 15, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Report abuse |
  17. joe

    stand with montanna on this one. Corpoations are not people. Hope this passes and it opens the door to get rid of the super pacs. They have ruined our elections and made a mockery of democracy. Forward. Vote Obama or you will see more conservitive judges on the supereme court making laws that will take the rights away from people.

    October 15, 2012 at 11:41 am | Report abuse |

    Time to sweep the unhinged GOBP tea potty out of the government that they hate so much.

    October 15, 2012 at 5:40 am | Report abuse |
  19. CTEd

    Here's an Idea. Let's do to corporations what they do to us. We have to take drug tests to work there (violation of the 4th amendment) and have to sign away our lives to use a computer program these days. So lets turn that around. Corps might be people but they have no right to exist. Articles of incorporation that limit liability are not a constitutional right. So lets remove it. Let's remove the liability shield on corps so that people harmed by them can sue the CEO and the board of directors.

    Now we can put the libaility clase back into a section that also says they agree not to engage in campaing financing.... so there ya go, no rights violated. THey can buy all the elections they want but they get no liabiliy shield, or they can have the liability sheild and not buy campains.

    Wont solve the indivual problem like soros or the koch brothers but still it's a start.

    October 15, 2012 at 1:52 am | Report abuse |
    • Veritas

      Believe me I am no fan of big corporations and I hope that they are declared "nonpersons" eventually, preferably through a Constitutional amendment or, if not, then at least by the Supreme Court reversing itself. However, you claim that corporations violate the Fourth Amendment by requiring drug tests is false. The Constitution applies to the GOVERNMENT; it does not regulate industry or what happens in the private sector. That is done through legislation. Your Constitutional civil liberties are prohibitions against the GOVERNMENT doing certain things. The GOVERNMENT cannot conduct unreasonable searches and seizures. Your employment for a company that conducts drug testing is voluntary; you do not have to work there if you do not wish to submit to a drug test. Your employment is voluntary.

      October 15, 2012 at 9:43 am | Report abuse |
  20. Phil G

    where's my gun. shoot'em while you see'em

    October 15, 2012 at 12:34 am | Report abuse |
    • HOWARD

      OBAMA, BIDEN. and AXELROD, excuse their mishandling of the Libya debacle, by blaming the intelligence community for failing to provide proper and timely information ... George Bush invaded Iraq, based on improper intelligence regarding WMD's in Iraq's arsenal ... however Obama, Biden, and Axelrod never accepted that excuse ... in fact, they crucified George Bush for FOUR YEARS, ad nauseum, in response to his using that explanation.

      October 15, 2012 at 12:44 am | Report abuse |
      • Winkie

        Not that it will matter to you, I'll still point out that the Obama administration's response was judged long before anyone (including Mitt Romney) knew exactly what was going on. Bush's debacle went on for many months before any admission of error was announced. You're comparing grapes to wine. You also compare a mistake that cost us some dear American lives in Libya to one that put us at war for years and cost tens of thousands of lives, including thousands of US soldiers in Iraq. Nice try though.

        October 16, 2012 at 6:55 am | Report abuse |
        • Jim

          Not only that but think of the number of Americans who died based on Bush's 'intelligence failing' vs. the number of folks who died in the Libyan attack. Bush deserved far more scorn for his mishandling of the Iraq invasion that Obama does for Libya,

          October 16, 2012 at 9:24 am | Report abuse |
  21. Rudy Gonzales

    Senator Linsey Graham and all other critics of Obama's handling of the Libya consulate matter should push Romney to release ten years of Income taxes to prove he's ot hiding anything from the tax man. No trust should be given since Romney hasn't earned it. Romney saying American citizens have a right to know about Libya goes hand in hand with American citizens have a right to know what Romny is hiding from the public by not showing ten years of tax returns as his daddy did! Hey, Romney! Hey Ryan! No details, no information, no tax returns, no trust of the people, no votes from me!

    October 14, 2012 at 8:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Dave

      Sure.....right after obama releases his college transcripts.

      October 15, 2012 at 12:06 am | Report abuse |
      • CTEd

        Candidates are never asked to release college transscripts and most have not. It is not common at all to do. Romney hasn't released his. Bush and Gore didn't release theirs (although someone found them and released them even though whoever gave them to the press violated federal law). EVERY presidental candidate since Romney's father has released tax returns.

        Try comparing apples to apples.

        October 15, 2012 at 1:45 am | Report abuse |
      • CandeeBR

        It figures, Obama put the Birthers to rest, so now they want something else that no other president or presidential candidate proviede.

        October 15, 2012 at 1:51 pm | Report abuse |
      • Jim

        So cheating on your taxes and possible committing crimes (an IRA with $100 Million)...and possibly having poor college grades are the same thing? Seriously? I don't even get how these things are even mentioned in the same sentence.

        October 16, 2012 at 9:27 am | Report abuse |
  22. dahdit

    So, they're running a secretly funded campaign to legalize secretly funded campaigns. Next step, secret candidates! Just vote a straight ticket and the winner will be named by the winning party. After that, secret elections!

    October 14, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Report abuse |
  23. George Herbert Walker Shrub

    When the government fails to protect its citizens it's up to the citizens to protect themselves. All 50 states should have had such a ballot measure in 2012. The movement has begun and the people will eventually prevail.

    October 14, 2012 at 6:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • ironman59

      The reality is we were supposed to have campaign reform in 1994. Rember the Contract On America and at the top of that list was campaign reform. Unfortunately the public bought it and let the gop control Congress. As soon as fig newton & the boys were in charge suddenly it was on the back burner. It woudl be too difficult and the country ahd too many pressing issues. Roll forward to SCOTUS ruling that corporations which do not live, breathe or have a pulse are now "people" who can spend as much on campaigns as possible to buy their candidate.

      October 14, 2012 at 11:36 pm | Report abuse |
  24. Penny Wright

    Romney + Karl Rove + Rush Limbaugh + Grover Norquist + super rich + $uperPACs = 1%

    October 14, 2012 at 5:49 pm | Report abuse |
  25. Penny Wright

    Corporate greed destroyed the world economy in 2008.

    Republicans want it to happen again.

    October 14, 2012 at 5:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mitt Romney is Gordon Gecko

      You got that right:

      October 15, 2012 at 12:13 pm | Report abuse |
  26. Lost

    The so-called handouts that people are receiving to help with economic woes, is used increasingly to help cushion the blow of the last 10-15 years of the rising cost of living. It's going to take more time to repair the damages of two wars, far more than four years. I think we are on the right track just as we are. No need to change hands over to a gamble. All political parties are needed to help brainstorm numerous ways to alleviate the inevitable problems ahead. Why aren't they doing this? Why are voters accepting these mud-slinging dog fights? Everyone should be fed up with politics that only kiss rich ass.

    October 14, 2012 at 4:59 pm | Report abuse |
  27. sayer

    When Bain took over a corporation, loaded it with debt, raided its pension fund, and laid off the workers, was it legitimate rape?

    October 14, 2012 at 4:11 pm | Report abuse |
    • old golfer

      Bain generally took over corporations that were heavy in debt, some facing bankruptcy. Bain saved most of these companies and also many US jobs.

      October 15, 2012 at 10:41 am | Report abuse |
  28. NoTags

    As has been stated before, I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one.

    October 14, 2012 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
  29. streetWise

    "People are corporations my friend" Mitt Romney 2012... If corporations are "People", where are the positions/statuses of citizens, voters, workers, etc... "Second Class" serfs of the feudal "Company Store"? Romney has a "Plantation" view of economics and considers employees as "Share Planter" renters on the "Lords" land. That' a prefect definition of a Oligarchy and it is coming our way through the R/R tax plan. More doubling down on "Trickle Down" Reaganomics and put the homeowner out on the streets.

    October 14, 2012 at 2:06 pm | Report abuse |
    • HOWARD


      923 Executive Orders in 40 Months During my lifetime, all Presidents have issued Executive Orders, for reasons that vary, some more than others. When a President issued as many as 30 Executive Orders during a term in Office, people thought there was something amiss. WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT 923 EXECUTIVE ORDERS IN ONE PART OF ONE TERM?????? YES, THERE IS A REASON. IT IS THAT THIS PRESIDENT IS DETERMINED TO TAKE CONTROL AWAY FROM THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE AND BYPASS ANY RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

      October 14, 2012 at 2:37 pm | Report abuse |
      • dwayne

        There is no truth the number 923. Try about a 140.

        October 14, 2012 at 6:02 pm | Report abuse |
      • Garydon

        Sorry Howard. The reason the President must sign these Executive Orders (about 150 of them) is because he has no other choice to keep government running. Mitch McConnell in the Senate and John Boehner in the House have SWORN TO BLOCK every major initiative, about 97% of all the Bills and Federal appointments, including judges and the federal budget deadlines that have reaped havoc on our economy and hurt U.S. families and workers. You probably missed that. They also blocked the (2.5 million) Jobs Act and dozens of other measures that would have helped U.S.citizens and the ecomomy. Why? Because, as McConnell said, "Defeating Barack Obama is our number one mission". You may have missed that too. When opposing forces (Neo-Con's and Tea Bagger congressmen) obstruct the business of government, you lose your voice to negotiate better deals for your side. You also lose votes from Independents like me, who see this obstructionist manuvering as reckless, and childish behavior. Me? I'm providing transportation to the polls for nursing home bound Obama supporters. These are the Greatest Generation voters that you say shouldn't vote because they no longer have driver's lincense photo ID's. See you at the polls, sucka!

        October 14, 2012 at 9:23 pm | Report abuse |
      • AnaHadWolves

        Put down the Kool-Aid, Howard and take a deep breath. Obviously, you're a tool of the Tea Party/Republicans. If you're going to post, please have the common decency to check your facts and figures before doing so.

        You're entitled to your own opinion; you are NOT entitled to your own facts.

        October 15, 2012 at 8:38 am | Report abuse |
      • Duane Allen

        Get back on your meds, Howard.

        October 15, 2012 at 3:30 pm | Report abuse |
  30. cashmeremafia

    If I live in Montana, you would have my vote for the amendment too!! You go Montanans, this is what a Democratic Republic is all about!!! It's no coincidence the opposition group conceals their funding too....

    October 14, 2012 at 1:47 pm | Report abuse |
  31. jude

    Blast Fitness centers in texas are only allowing Fx News on their televisions!!!! just like all those ceo's emailing their employees and staff to vote for repubs or else....our country is really stinking nuts when the folks with the power and $$$$$ take these extremes.

    October 14, 2012 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • GaryDon

      Hey Jude... Did you hear Texas is changing their state motto? It's now, "We're Ignert Facists, and Right Proud of It!" My neighbor just got it on his Lexus' vanity license plate! But if you think THAT's bad, consider poor Oklahoma where all 77 counties (100%) voted for Sarah Palin and what's-his-name in 2008! New public health statistics show that life expectancy for men in Oklahoma is actually DECLINING rather than rising, because of no affordable healthcare, or no healthcare at all. Just like a third world country! Gee, do you think there's a link here???? Plus poor Oklahoma vote's in Jim Inhofe to the Senate each year. Jim's an "Oily" who thinks the Earth is 3,000 years old, that science is Tom Foolery, that Exxon-Mobil is a person just like grandma, and that life begins with erection. Poor Oklahoma... Poor Texas... The 1% have spent alot of money to create an army of intellectually challenged bubbas to vote the way they want them to vote. What's best for the 1% is best of all, by God!

      October 14, 2012 at 9:46 pm | Report abuse |
  32. MtWatch

    Your absolutely RIGHT Mr. Nowell...with the corporate backing of the politicians in this state, we are at the mercy of the ranchers, corporations and MAJOR contributions from hunters and trappers! As a result this state is no longer a SAFE state for the average citizen...not to mention the wildlife and lands that have been decimated by these power/money hungry entities. IT IS CRITICAL THAT MONTANA BE PROTECTED! IT IS TIME THEY LOSE CONTROL OF OUR GOVERNMENT...ALL THE WAY TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!

    October 14, 2012 at 12:35 pm | Report abuse |
    • Vegabern

      The only people ruining hunting are the greedy landowners who whore out their land to the highest bidding guide and ban a grandpa trying to take his grandson out for his first deer. Oh, and of course the people that forced us to take in Canadian wolves who are decimating our elk, deer, and moose populations.

      October 15, 2012 at 12:44 pm | Report abuse |
  33. Richard

    I think it is time to give the real election process back to the people of the USA.

    It is time to remove the special interest groups, corporations and super PAC contributors from our process. It is they who influence our elections by the sheer enormity of the money they pump in to campaigns. It is they and their money that has turned our election process in to the laughing stock of the world.

    Since the Super Pacs are not required to tell where the money comes from, It leaves me to assume the worst; China, Russia, the mobs etc.

    The Supreme Court ruled in June and overturned a 100 year old law, that Montana’s law limited free speech rights of corporations.

    What a bunch of hogwash that is. People within a corporation have the rights of free speech but I do not believe that corporations should be in the same class. Again it seems like it is a case of large corporations buying a decision from our supreme court.

    It is time to take our process back. I hope Montanans approve this bill. It could be the start for the rest of us.

    Now for Term Limits!!!!


    October 14, 2012 at 12:25 pm | Report abuse |
  34. stepren

    "People are corporations my friend" Mitt Romney 2012

    October 14, 2012 at 12:11 pm | Report abuse |
  35. Jim

    They are correct. The way to fight big money influence is through legislation, ideally a consitutional amendment. This year its the Kochs buying a presidency. Who will it be the buyer next time? China? Saudi Arabia? Once big money is in control, there is not much we will be able to do about it.

    October 14, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
  36. Heavensdevil

    I have a new respect for the people of Montana. They are putting it on the ballot and more should follow just that simple process. A bad decision at the federal level (SCOTUS) must always be questioned fairly. Remember it is only the people that can correct legislated errors if that is what they are while courts just affirm or object to the legislation as written and the courts must respect the legislation of the people.

    October 14, 2012 at 12:03 pm | Report abuse |
  37. bigfoot

    Montanans would have no need for this is we didn't have a fascist majority on the Supreme Court. They SHOULD be backing Obama so that that majority doesn't get even WORSE.

    October 14, 2012 at 11:14 am | Report abuse |
  38. Woody Stemms

    Go for it Montana!

    You have the right idea!

    October 14, 2012 at 11:04 am | Report abuse |
  39. M Nowell

    To CNN and Listners, I cant see how its fair, not to disclose who the contributors to any campaing fund, heck for all we know, China may be the contributor.Also, it may be an agenda to poision our lands, people and animals,and all life here in America, and at the same time extract our gold and all other precious metals and other resources, sending them to who knows where.I mean , really, you all at CNN require disclosure of whos sending in comments, right?In fact this subject must be so touchy, that on my com, it shows "no responses" yet on this subject. Im a simple man, with simple solutions, that in my simple mind ,I, at least govern what I think and say, by , "fairness, reasonability, honesty, integrity", these obviosly are tenets that have been grossly overlooked, and suppressed over the last 100 years, when it comes to corporate greed, governmental workings behind the backs of the people that they claim to "represent", and most dealings with foriegn entities.Mabey naive of me to say, but the damage is done to prove that the old way of doing buisness in the world isnt the right way.At the same time , our economy depends so heavily on these corporations anymore that to hammer fist them in to shutting down isnt an option either. To me, the answer is simple, "disclosure of contributors, or ban them all from contributing at all", and the enviromental destruction to all lands for resources, well, plain and simple, "force the corporations to completely restore all worked lands back to original condition",, and the resources, ,we all want these resources to benifit "WE the People, as well as create wealth for corporations and investors", lets decide to run our buisnesses in a fair way, say, 50%, to the restoration of our lands and benifits to our people, 25 % to the corporations to divide as they see fit, and the rest to the Gubment, to pay off their outrageous spending extremes that presidents like Obama, and even others have accrued. Thing is , the back room deals have to stop, and the majority can agree on this, as well as the rest.I for one dont think a communist approach to the nationalizing of natioal,natural resources, is feasible. Look at the countries that have tried, they are mostly waste lands now.Uninhabitable. Who wants that?When the rich investors finally realize that they too, will have to wear the enviromental suit, and gas mask, just to live and breathe, and that money alone dont buy them life and happiness in the long run, it will be too late.A whole economy needs to be started, that is dedicated to land restoration.But, at the same time, not completly at the expense of just the upper crust of the rich, they tend , as always to just ignore, walk away,or duck and avoid,with lawyers, the real issues and problems, all need to contribute,and join in physically the hard work that is at hand.All People.With, money, time and hands on effort.Like that cesspool in Montana, the worst of the worst. Here in Florida, we have acid lakes, created by the phosphate mines , that are so toxic, that to fall into would almost certainly mean death. I suggested that why cant we create those lakes into giant , clean batteries?Just a suggestion , of the way of thinking that we need to persue, to help, and to use what we have.Truly making lemonade out of lemons. Not charging admission to a spectale, that is a total cop out. Cant anyone see it like I do?

    October 13, 2012 at 5:57 am | Report abuse |
    • ally buster

      Well said!

      -Remember folks, corporations are NOT people. They do NOT have the same rights as a citizen!

      October 14, 2012 at 10:55 am | Report abuse |
      • W.Luyten

        Corporation have no loyalty towards any government , or people.

        October 14, 2012 at 2:29 pm | Report abuse |