Here are the 3 citizen-led initiatives set for Montana’s general election ballot
Three of the 10 citizen-proposed ballot measures have been finalized for Montana’s general election in November.
Two of them, if passed, would install new provisions in the Montana Constitution; one deals with judicial elections and the other is an attempt to fortify the ballot initiative process itself. A third proposal seeks to take on corporate spending in Montana’s elections through changes to state law. A majority of general election voters must approve of a measure for it to pass.
None of the ideas materialized in isolation. Rather, the two constitutional initiatives are in direct response to efforts by Republicans, the state’s dominant political party, at the state Legislature. The statutory amendment known as “The Montana Plan” looks to grapple with the mountains of out-of-state money dumped into state elections to influence voters.
Montana’s general election is on Nov. 3.
Nonpartisan courts
One of the constitutional initiatives would preserve the nonpartisan status of Montana’s judicial elections. The proposal identified as CI-132 follows the Montana Republican Party’s efforts at the state Legislature to tilt judicial campaigns into partisan affairs.
The state GOP has declared its opposition to CI-132, while former members of the Supreme Court bench, such as retired Chief Justice Mike McGrath and former Associate Justice Patricia Cotter, have spoken out in support.
“You don’t need to be a lawyer to understand that politics doesn’t belong in our courts and that we need to make sure judges are accountable to the law and the constitution, not political parties and their money,” said retired Dawson County Sheriff Craig Anderson in a press release issued this week by Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts, the campaign group behind the initiative.
Montanans for Nonpartisan Courts has raised considerable sums this year for its efforts. By the time it turned in over 100,000 signatures for the proposal in June, the campaign had raised over $2.7 million; more than many of this year’s congressional candidates.