Republicans hold a 50-49 edge over Democrats in the House, with the lone Constitution Party member, Rep. Rick Jore of Ronan, usually voting with Republicans.
Democrats have a 26-24 margin in the Senate. If Sen. Sam Kitzenberg of Glasgow hadn’t switched to the Democratic Party in November, the Senate would be tied 25-25.
So House Republicans believe that only they stand in the way, protecting Montanans from what they consider the wild-spending, government-loving ways of Democrats, and instead want to return the excess money to taxpayers.
They believe some of the $1 billion state general fund surplus exists because of the tax cuts and spending restraints that occurred when Republicans controlled the governor’s office and both legislative chambers for a decade until 2005.
Democratic lawmakers and Schweitzer see it differently.
Democrats insist they are spending and investing the state general fund surplus prudently and will give some back to taxpayers. They contend that many proposed budget increases are necessary because Republicans shortchanged education and human services when in power.
The Montana Constitution requires all appropriations bills to originate in the House. That includes what’s been the major budget bill, traditionally known as House Bill 2, which budgets the money to run all of state government for two years.
Joint House and Senate appropriations subcommittees have been working on their respective sections of HB2. It’s slated to come to the House Appropriations Committee for a vote and then go to the House floor.
What gravels House Republicans is that once HB2 leaves the House, they know the Democratic Senate will pump in more money, as the Senate always has, no matter which party controls the upper chamber.
However, the House still must vote on any Senate changes to HB2, and if representatives reject the changes, it will be up to a conference committee to negotiate a solution. But the Senate’s version of the budget remains intact unless both chambers negotiators agree to change it.
So last week, Republicans in both houses confirmed they may divide HB2 into as many as eight separate bills, with each standing on its own.
House Majority Leader Michael Lange, R-Billings, said Republicans will decide by Tuesday whether to do this.
“We want to make sure there is the integrity and ability of the House to have an equal say with the Senate on the budget,” Lange said.
While the House can reject any Senate changes to HB2, Lange compared it to “a herd of musk oxen running around together.” Instead, he said, each section should stand on its own as a separate bill, which was the method Montana used until 1977.
“We think we can speed up the process significantly by debating each section (as a separate bill),” Lange said.
So House Republicans want to draw a Maginot Line to mount a defense against greater government spending that they see in the Schweitzer budget. Republicans instead want to give more of this money back to taxpayers in the form of hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks.
Even if HB2 is split into eight separate bills, Senate Democrats will still get the bills last. There will still be up to eight conference committees. Ultimately, Schweitzer must sign or veto these bills, just like with HB2.
Carving one bill into eight may seem like inside baseball, but Democrats fear it could heap more confusion on top of an already complex budget process, risk delaying the session’s adjournment and possibly require a special legislative session, all to Montanans’ dismay.
Senate Democratic leaders say they will deal with eight bills if necessary, but question the House Republicans’ logic.
“They (House Republicans) have HB2 right now,” said Senate Majority Leader Carol Williams, D-Missoula. “They have total control. Their folks are chairing the committees. To say that they won’t be in total control is a puzzlement to me.”
Asked why Montanans should care whether there are one or eight appropriations bills, Williams said: “This is the state’s budget. HB2 (itself) doesn’t matter. People do know we’re required to have a budget and a balanced budget. We ought to do it in an efficient and economical way.”
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)