On identical 51-49 votes, all 50 Republicans, joined by Rep. Rick Jore, C-Ronan, passed budgets for the higher and K-12 education and natural resources, commerce and agricultural agencies.
All 49 Democrats opposed the spending bills, which face a final House vote before moving to the Democratic-controlled Senate.
$5 million in each of the next two years for anticipated state firefighting costs,
$2 million for the governor's college scholarship program and elimination of a $1.2 million tribal economic development program.
For these three bills, the House approved spending $134.6 million less on these agencies than what Democrat Gov. Brian Schweitzer proposed for the next two years, although these revised budgets are still greater overall than what these agencies now get.
It was a highly contentious debate, with some members' tempers rising. The dean of the House, Rep. Bill Glaser, R-Huntley, said the House was “a bit dysfunctional,” but he hoped members could work together better later.
After the debate, party leaders continued the attack.
“What happened is exactly what was expected,” said House Appropriations Chairman John Sinrud, R-Bozeman. “The Democrats didn't want to participate in the process.”
The only way Democrats apparently will vote for the budget bills is for the spending levels to look exactly like what Schweitzer proposed, he said.
Sinrud estimated state spending still would rise by $300 million, which he called “a pretty healthy increase overall” with not one agency facing overall spending cuts.
But House Minority Leader John Parker, D-Great Falls, criticized House Republicans for making cuts to “important programs for Montana families” to win Jore's vote.
“Today we saw cuts in work force training programs that help the Montana economy, college scholarships to ease the tuition burden, wildfire suppression money and the tribal economic development commission was zeroed out,' Parker said.
Jore said afterward he was willing to accept the level of budget cuts in the first three bills, “understanding that we have other bills coming.”
“My view is I'd like to see additional cuts, but I recognize at the same time that some Republicans are going to be stretched,” he said. “I'm viewing the budget as a whole.”
The bills passed, but not before Democrats protested how Republicans had split up the traditional single budget bill into now eight parts.
Democrats also objected to Sinrud and perhaps a few others unilaterally reduced the budget bills recommended by the bipartisan House-Senate budget subcommittees.
Republicans defended their effort to hold down state spending so they can provide more in tax relief back to Montanans.
“We have an extremely bloated budget in my opinion,” said House Majority Whip Tom McGillvray, R-Billings. “If we spend it all, we can't return any of it to the people of Montana who paid it.”
Referring to the higher education budget, Rep. Jack Wells, R-Bozeman, said, “You can't have all the cake and eat it all at the same time.”
Replied Rep. Eve Franklin, R-Great Falls: “I don't believe that this budget represents cake. I think it is meat and potatoes for the people of Montana.”
Countered Wells: “This is not meat and potatoes. This is prime rib. It could have been made (into) surf and turf.”
Rep. Dan Villa, D-Anaconda, criticized how the Republican budget bills were revised by Sinrud.
“Democracy does not take place in a basement in Bozeman,” Villa said. “Democracy takes place here.”
An angry Sinrud bristled at the accusation.
“We can go ahead and not like the process, just like a little kid who sits in the corner not playing the game because he doesn't his way,” Sinrud said. “I at least want to participate in the process rather than sitting in the corner. If you want to participate in the process, this is it.”
House Minority Floor Leader Art Noonan, D-Butte, rose angrily, and said, “We are not little children on this side of the aisle. We will not be bullied in this process.”
Democrats, he said, “are voting our consciences and for the people of Montana.”
Other Democrats, including some of the American Indian lawmakers and teachers, objected to the plan to transfer the Indian Education for All program from the Office of Public Instruction to local school districts. They said most school districts had ignored the requirement for years.
“If we continue on in this way in this bill, we'll go back to court,” said Rep. Jonathan Windy Boy, D-Box Elder.
Rep. Shannon Augare, D-Browning, criticized the elimination of the tribal economic development program, saying: “I could not help but feel like Indian Country is under attack today.”
That bill's sponsor, Rep. Rick Ripley, R-Wolf Creek, said both parties voted in committee against his attempt to restore that and other money in the Commerce Department budget.
“We all know that this is a beginning, not an end to the process,” he said.
|
 |
 |
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)