|
By Joe Carbonari
Gov. Steve Bullock took action that he knew would engender severe partisan attack. He did this because he considered it the right thing to do. It took courage. It was not simply a partisan decision. In 2006 Jon Tester won a close election against incumbent Sen. Conrad Burns that was instrumental in determining the control of the Senate and the direction that the country would take. The Walsh versus Daines contest could be similarly decisive as the balance of the Senate is again at stake. Neither Steve Daines nor John Walsh appears legitimately assailable on the basis of character. They are both good men, and neither is expected to stray far from their respective party’s positions on important measures. Their differences lie largely in their desires to advance or to re-direct current policies. The 2012 vote on LR-122 showed what most people, including many Democrats, felt. We didn’t like the health insurance mandate. Many of us swallowed a good bit of what we didn’t like to get what we felt was the greater good – a start on comprehensive health care reform. We swallowed hard, and we did it. Bullock has done what he felt was necessary to advance what he deeply feels is right. I applaud him for it, and I hope that it works. |
By Tim Baldwin
Gov. Steve Bullock, a Democrat, recently appointed Lt. Gov. John Walsh, a Democrat, to the same Senate seat for which he is running against Steve Daines. The reason seems all too clear: to help Walsh beat Steve Daines, R-Mont. Polls show Daines ahead of Walsh (Politico.com, 11/19/13), so Walsh needs every advantage in one of the nation’s most important Senate races. Thanks to Bullock, Walsh got major help. Walsh admits he has little political experience, which makes his appointment more suspect. Walsh states he will “fight against career politicians who have lost touch with their constituents.” This is hard to believe considering he favors Obamacare even though in 2012, 67 percent of Montana voters voted to prohibit the federal government from mandating individuals to buy health insurance (see, LR-122/SB-418). Will Walsh abide by the will of Montana regarding Obamacare? No; so what will make Walsh different than the “career politicians” he accuses of “losing touch with their constituents?” The New York Times calls this appointment what it is: “a move Democrats hope will improve their chances of retaining the seat in what is expected to be a fiercely fought election this November.” This appointment was not a choice for Montana, but for Democrats. |