Montana
Busse beats Gianforte on latest fundraising haul • Daily Montanan
![Busse beats Gianforte on latest fundraising haul • Daily Montanan Busse beats Gianforte on latest fundraising haul • Daily Montanan](https://dailymontanan.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/IMG_5274-scaled.jpg)
Money talks, as the old saying goes, and right now it may be telling the story that Republicans are more vulnerable than previously thought, according to fundraising reports and a political scientist.
On Wednesday, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ryan Busse, who is challenging Republican incumbent Greg Gianforte, announced its campaign had raised more money during the previous quarter than Gianforte, notable for several reasons.
Gianforte, a multi-millionaire, has largely been able to bankroll his own elections to both Congress and the governorship. However, his donations haven’t kept pace with his opponent, who has been hammering on the message of property taxes, which have hit many Treasure State residents hard.
In official campaign finance reports filed with the State of Montana, Busse reports $525,533 raised from June 15 through Aug. 15, not including more than $135,000 it transferred from its primary account to the general election account. In that same period, Gianforte raised $355,404 for the general election but that number does not include $94,302 received for his primary account.
In other words, Busse hauled $170,129 more than Gianforte in the most recent quarter if transfers and primary contributions aren’t counted.
Even though Busse showed larger fund-raising results during the quarter, the incumbent governor still sits on substantially more cash than his Democratic opponent by a wide margin. In the same report, Gianforte reported having $745,819 on hand to Busse’s $234,302.
Paul Pope, associate professor of political science at Montana State University-Billings, said that Busse’s recent fundraising success could be the result of several different influences, including Gianforte’s vulnerability on statewide issues, or the surge of enthusiasm that was created when U.S. President Joe Biden decided to step aside, allowing Vice President Kamala Harris to emerge.
Pope said Gianforte is vulnerable because of the deeply unpopular property increases, despite a program to offer rebates of as much as $675 to homeowners per year.
That decision on property taxes has rankled Republican members of Gianforte’s party as county-level Republicans have been frustrated by Gianforte, who they’ve said has lied about out-of-control spending at the local level. It hasn’t been the first time that Republicans have been alienated by the governor.
“That’s where (Gianforte) is losing people,” Pope said. “The tax cuts and his hype about the property taxes just doesn’t match the follow through.”
Last year, Republicans in the Legislature struck a deal with Democrats on how to allocate funding from recreational marijuana taxes, which included support for veterans and wildlife habitat. That measure was vetoed by Gianforte, which upset many members of his own party, and also led to a protracted legal battle and unsuccessful veto override. That strongly bipartisan deal included additional money for county roads, a perennial challenge for county governments across the state.
Gianforte’s popularity, especially in a state that has trended toward increasingly conservative candidates and a Republican supermajority in the Legislature, has been stalled. Gianforte has consistently showed a neutral favorability rating in a state where every major office holder is a Republican and only one statewide Democrat, incumbent U.S. Sen. Jon Tester faces a tough challenger in Bozeman businessman Tim Sheehy.
“I think Gianforte may be taking for granted who he is — that he’s a Republican in a Republican state,” Pope said.
Pope’s department leads the Mountain States Polling project at MSU-B, which conducted a survey of Montana prior to the primary election, and will conduct another poll this fall in October, closer to Election Day.
He said that the momentum for the Democrats has been positive since Biden stepped aside, Harris’ selection and her selection of Tim Walz. Also, that the topic of abortion is on the ballot could also factor into the fundraising.
“All that energy at the top,” Pope said, “That excitement opens up purse strings. You can feel the energy.”
Still, as successful as one quarter of fund-raising may be for Busse, Pope warned that history is also a powerful indicator, and Democrats have underperformed in statewide races recently. Moreover, Montanans have to be convinced to vote for a Democrat, and that takes an “all-of-the-above strategy,” Pope said.
“The question is: Does Busse have enough time?” Pope said. “He has to use every tool in the arsenal. He’s got to take to the air game with advertisement, the ground game with door knocking and become visible.”
However, he said, the consistently neutral favorability rating of Gianforte, a Republican in a Republican-dominated state recently, spells trouble.
“He’s incredibly vulnerable. He’s not expecting to be, so the question is: Can Busse tap into it?” Pope said. “The Democratic Party has been extremely lackluster in getting good candidates, so many time the good ones are on their own.”
![](https://newspub.live/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/np-logo.png)
Montana
Wethersfield native missing in Montana
![Wethersfield native missing in Montana Wethersfield native missing in Montana](https://media.nbcconnecticut.com/2024/08/Grant-Marcuccio-missing.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&resize=1200%2C675)
Grant Marcuccio, a Wethersfield native, went hiking in Glacier National Park in Montana and is missing.
The 32-year-old who now lives in Whitefish, Montana has been missing since Sunday evening, according to the National Park Service.
Rangers were alerted on Sunday night that he was missing after he did not show up to meet up with others and search teams have been trying to find him.
Marcuccio is 6 feet tall, has short brown hair, brown eyes, and might be wearing brown shorts and a brown and white checkered shirt, according to the National Park Service.
Anyone who has information or was in the area and saw him is asked to call the park tip line at 406-888-7077.
Montana
A GOP Senate Candidate Tried To Do Damage Control — And It Backfired
![A GOP Senate Candidate Tried To Do Damage Control — And It Backfired A GOP Senate Candidate Tried To Do Damage Control — And It Backfired](https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/66c785e624000032005790fd.jpeg?ops=1200_630)
Montana GOP Senate hopeful Tim Sheehy has spent the last several months defending himself against accusations that he poses a threat to America’s federal public lands — a mess that the multimillionaire businessman and former Navy SEAL created when, shortly after launching his campaign, he explicitly called for federal lands to be “turned over to state agencies, or even counties.”
Around 640 million acres, or 28% of all land in the nation, are managed by the federal government — and owned collectively by all U.S. citizens. Republicans across Western states, where the vast majority of federal lands are located, have long sought to wrest control of them from the federal government — a move that conservationists and public land experts warn would ultimately lead to them being sold and privatized.
“If that happens, that really means we’re going to lose those federal lands,” said Chris Marchion, a Montana public lands advocate and inductee in the Montana Outdoor Hall of Fame. “The state of Montana does not have the resources to manage those lands, and the first thing they’re going to do is sell it.”
Democratic and conservation-focused political action committees have aired numerous public land-focused attack ads against Sheehy, most of which cite HuffPost’s reporting that first revealed Sheehy’s comments in support of transferring land and his failure to disclose his position on the board of a nonprofit with a history of advocating for privatizing America’s federal lands.
Sheehy meanwhile has accused his opponent, incumbent Democratic Sen. Jon Tester, of politicizing public lands and lying about Sheehy’s agenda for America’s natural heritage. Sometime last month, Sheehy even added a section to his campaign website titled “Public Lands,” in which he declared his belief that “public lands belong in public hands” and vowed to “oppose any federal transfer or sale of our public lands.” The new section sits at the very top of his issues page.
In Sheehy’s first public lands TV ad, released in early August, Stryker Anderson, an avid Montana hunter and hunting guide, says he’s “sick and tired of Jon Tester lying about Tim Sheehy.”
“Here’s the truth: Tim Sheehy knows public lands are important to our way of life,” Anderson tells viewers. “That’s why Sheehy opposes the sale or transfer of our public lands.”
But when reached via email this week, Anderson — one of two key people Sheehy turned to in hopes of restoring his image as a champion of public lands — effectively poured gasoline on the fire that Sheehy and his team have been trying to put out. Anderson plainly stated that he wants to see federal lands transferred to states, a view he understood Sheehy to share. He condemned the federal government as a poor steward of the federal estate and said Sheehy’s past comment in favor of states taking control of federal lands shows his “understanding of proper management.”
“The goal would be to turn them over to the states,” Anderson told HuffPost. “The state of Montana understands our public lands better than the federal government. Just like we don’t understand California, Wyoming, Washington, Arizona, etc. Let the people in their own state decide what is best for them. Our public lands suck almost everywhere because they have no management. Turning over ownership to the states will allow for much better management.”
Aaron Weiss, deputy director at the Colorado-based conservation group Center for Western Priorities, called Anderson’s comments “old Sagebrush Rebellion nonsense,” referring to the movement of the 1970s and ’80s that sought to wrest control of shared public lands from the federal government.
“States can’t afford to fight wildfires or clean up abandoned mines,” Weiss said. “The inevitable result is privatization.”
Asked how “turning over ownership to the states” is any different than a full-fledged public land transfer, Anderson said the TV advertisement’s anti-sale and transfer message was specific to the “sale or transfer to private ownership,” not state ownership.
“You are correct that turning it over would be a transfer,” he said. “But who it is transferred to is what is important.”
Again, Sheehy’s updated website states that he opposes “any federal transfer or sale of our public lands.”
Anderson’s unfiltered endorsement of pawning off federal lands to states — a position he clearly expected Sheehy to advance in Congress — threatens to effectively upend nearly a year of damage control within Sheehy’s camp.
When reached on Thursday, Sheehy’s campaign dissociated itself from its own public lands surrogate. Campaign spokesperson Katie Martin said Sheehy does not share Anderson’s support for transferring federal lands to states, but did not respond when asked why Sheehy chose to feature someone he does not see eye-to-eye with — particularly on the very subject of the advertisement.
“Your answer shopping won’t change Tim’s position on this issue, which is crystal clear and has been stated to you repeatedly,” Martin said in an email. “Tim opposes any federal transfer or sale or ‘turning over’ of our public lands.”
Michael Ciaglo via Getty Images
While that may be Sheehy’s purported position now, he sang a very different tune shortly after launching his campaign. As HuffPost first reported in October, Sheehy told the “Working Ranch Radio Show” that “local control has to be returned, whether that means, you know, some of these public lands get turned over to state agencies, or even counties, or whether those decisions are made by a local landlord instead of by, you know, federal fiat a few thousand miles away.” Contacted about his comments at the time, Sheehy’s campaign tried to walk a splintering tightrope, telling HuffPost that “calling for better management and more local control is not the same as ‘transferring them.’”
Pressed about the conflicting and misleading messaging, Anderson said “it is hard to explain someone’s stance on a 30-second ad or even on someone’s website,” adding that public lands are a “complex issue that takes time to discuss the entire scope.” As for the language Sheehy recently added to his website, Anderson said “he might be saying that because he knows reporters will twist it and make it sound like he is transferring or selling off public lands to private entities.”
“If only we had honest journalism where the reporters cared about truth and the betterment of our lands, wildlife, environment and people,” he said.
The truth is that Sheehy said what he said early in his campaign, flipped his script and spent months working to repair his image, only to then dispatch someone who supports a state takeover of federal lands in hopes of convincing voters that federal lands would be safe in Sheehy’s hands if they elect him to the Senate.
A second surrogate
HuffPost also first reported that Sheehy failed to include his post on the board of the nonprofit Property and Environment Research Center, or PERC, in his Senate financial disclosure — a violation of Senate rules that further complicated his already muddled messaging on public lands. Sheehy’s campaign called it an “oversight” and later amended his financial disclosure.
For his second public lands ad, released last week, Sheehy tapped K.C. Walsh, with whom he served on PERC’s board for about a year before launching his campaign for Senate. Walsh is the longtime former president and executive chairman of Simms Fishing Products, the Bozeman, Montana-based manufacturer of high-end fishing gear.
In the ad, Walsh introduces himself as a longtime “advocate for conservation and public lands in Montana.”
“I voted for Jon Tester twice, but this time I’m supporting Tim Sheehy,” Walsh says. “As an aerial firefighter, Tim Sheehy’s been on the front lines, fighting wildfires to protect our forests in rural communities. Tim knows public lands belong in public hands, and I trust Tim Sheehy to protect and preserve access to Montana’s public lands.”
Founded in 1980 and based in Bozeman, PERC advocates for “free market environmentalism” — the idea that private property rights and market incentives achieve better environmental and conservation outcomes than government regulation. Over its history, PERC has called for privatizing federal lands, including national parks, and increasing fees for visiting parks and other federal lands. It has also been a staunch opponent of Montana’s unique stream access laws, which provide anglers and recreationists virtually unlimited access to the state’s rivers and streams, including those that flow through private property.
“Montana has led the way in the erosions of private property rights” via such laws, PERC’s Reed Watson wrote in 2009.
Bradley Jones, a Helena, Montana-based conservation advocate, told HuffPost “it is disingenuous of both Mr. Sheehy and Mr. Walsh to crow about Sheehy’s support for public lands when both of them come from PERC.”
“This is an organization that has made attacking public ownership of federal lands and support for the giveaway of public waters to the wealthy and landowners blessed enough to own prime real estate a cornerstone of their gospel; though they try to disguise it as academic musings on the economy,” he said. “By association with this group, Sheehy seems to be endorsing PERC’s ideology. Selling Montanans’ publicly owned lands and stream access, which are the only ‘riches’ most Montanans will inherit, is an extremely unpopular idea here.”
Along with serving on PERC’s board since 2020, Walsh is on the board of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and is a past board member of Trout Unlimited. In 2021, Montana GOP Gov. Greg Gianforte, who supports transferring control of federal lands to states and famously sued the state of Montana in 2009 to block river access on his property near Bozeman, appointed Walsh to serve on Montana’s Fish, Wildlife and Parks Commission — a state regulatory advisory committee that Gianforte stacked with rich industry executives.
Walsh did not respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment.
PERC has distanced itself from some of its own history, previously telling HuffPost that its past support for privatizing federal lands “is not representative of PERC’s current thinking” and that it “firmly believes that public lands should stay in public hands.”
Still, Sheehy’s time at the think tank has become fodder for his political opponents. In a TV ad earlier this month, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee argued that pay-to-play hunting and fishing access is “Montana’s future if Sheehy has his way.”
“He was on the board of an outfit that wanted to privatize public lands, even our national parks, sold off to the highest bidder,” the ad states. “Sheehy’s loaded, he’ll take that deal. What about you?”
A familiar quagmire
As in previous Montana elections, public lands have emerged as a key issue in this year’s contested Senate race — in no small part because Sheehy stepped on the same third rail as Republicans before him.
Take outgoing Montana congressman and unsuccessful Senate candidate Matt Rosendale. While running for the U.S. House of Representatives in 2014, Rosendale called for a state takeover of all Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management lands within Montana’s borders. By the time Rosendale took aim at Tester’s seat in 2018, Montana voters had forced him to turn tail. During a candidate debate that year, Rosendale acknowledged that “there was a time when I thought they could be better managed by the state,” but said he “talked to people all over the state, and they’ve made it exceedingly clear that they do not want those lands transferred. And I not only understand that, I agree with that.”
Nevertheless, Sheehy waded into the same political quagmire. And in recent months, Montana voters have been bombarded with ads that paint Sheehy as a rich outsider who threatens Montana’s prized federal lands and the Montana way of life. A native of Minnesota, Sheehy moved to Montana in 2014 after retiring from the Navy and founded Bridger Aerospace, a Bozeman-based aerial firefighting company.
As Sheehy works to walk back, or camouflage, his anti-federal land views, the Montana Republican Party — a party he’s seeking a leadership role in — is unabashedly clear.
The Montana GOP party platform, adopted in June, calls for the “granting of federally managed public lands to the state, and development of a transition plan for the timely and orderly transfer.”
It’s a position that poll after poll after poll shows a majority of residents in Montana and other states in the Mountain West oppose, as Sheehy is now learning the hard way.
As he campaigns for a fourth term in the Senate, Tester has touted his record of working to safeguard and expand protections for federal lands while casting Sheehy as part of the wealthy class that is buying up big ranches and locking the public out of surrounding public lands.
“Despite his best efforts to hide his position, transplant Tim Sheehy can’t run away from the fact that he publicly called to transfer Montana’s public lands, which would make it much easier for that land to be sold to out-of-state multimillionaires like him,” said Hannah Rehm, senior communications adviser for the Montana Democratic Party.
Sheehy’s troubles in the public lands arena don’t end with his ties to PERC and his pro-transfer comments. His cattle ranch, the Little Belt Cattle Company, has offered the sort of pay-to-play hunting that Tester says is turning Montana into a “playground” for the rich.
As NBC News reported, Sheehy’s ranch contracted with a private outfitter — which one is unclear — to sell paid hunting excursions and touted itself as a “premier destination for hunters” with “private access to over 500,000 acres of National Forest.” In 2022, the ranch offered a five-day, five-person archery hunt costing $12,500, which the Montana Free Press at the time identified as “the most spendy package currently available in Montana.”
Anderson, the outfitter featured in Sheehy’s ad, did not respond to HuffPost’s question about whether he’s ever guided hunts on Sheehy’s property but told HuffPost that Sheehy “allows hunters to come on his place where the previous owners did not.”
Sheehy’s view of the federal estate aligns with many Republicans in red Western states where the federal government controls large swaths of land: simply, that federal agencies are crappy landlords and local residents know best.
“When you get asked by your fellow hunters and fly fishermen, ‘Oh, I hear Tim’s gonna sell public lands?’, you tell them, ‘Hey, that’s bullshit. He’s not selling any public lands, but what he is saying is us, as the Montanans who live here, when I share a fence line with a [Bureau of Land Management] lease, I should have more say over what happens on the other side of that fence than some guy in New York City who comes and visits to fly fish for a week,’” Sheehy said at a meet-and-greet with voters in Twin Bridges, Montana, last month. “When I have a Forest Service road that goes through my property, and I use that, and I have a lease on that Forest Service, I should have more say of what happens there than some, you know, environmental student in Seattle.”
It’s a way of thinking that casts aside the fact that federal public lands are held in trust for all Americans, not just those most adjacent to them or who have enough money to buy thousands of acres next door. Every American, whether they live 1,000 feet or 1,000 miles from a swath of federal land, has an equal stake.
At the end of the day, Marchion says, Republicans like Sheehy “don’t want to tell you exactly what they want to do” when it comes to public lands. What Sheehy is telling voters now, that he will protect and preserve federal public lands, is “devious” and “deceptive,” he said.
“He’s learned that when he’s attacked for a vulnerability, then he just changes,” Marchion said. “He makes a statement, like, ‘I’m for public lands!’ Bullshit he is.”
“To say ‘I’m for public lands,’ it’s easy to say that,” he added. “How do you prove it?”
Montana
Democratic senator refuses to endorse Kamala Harris: ‘Two reasons’
![Democratic senator refuses to endorse Kamala Harris: ‘Two reasons’ Democratic senator refuses to endorse Kamala Harris: ‘Two reasons’](https://d.newsweek.com/en/full/2456471/tester-dc.jpg)
Democratic Senator Jon Tester of Montana gave two reasons as to why he won’t endorse a presidential candidate, including Vice President Kamala Harris, who is set to accept the party’s nomination tonight at the Democratic National Convention (DNC).
Tester, who faces a contentious battle for Montana’s Senate seat against Donald Trump-backed Republican Tim Sheehy, didn’t attend the four-day DNC in Chicago, Illinois. Instead, he opted to campaign in his home state. Tester is a three-term, moderate senator. His opponent, Sheehy, is a former Navy SEAL and an entrepreneur.
“I’m not going to endorse for the presidential and I will tell you why, because two reasons,” Tester said during a press conference in Hamilton, Montana on Thursday, according to The Independent Record of Helena.
“No. 1, I’m focused on my race. And No. 2, folks want to nationalize this race, and this isn’t about national politics, this is about Montana. It’s about making sure we have a Montanan back in Washington, D.C., representing Montana values. And so that’s why,” the local outlet reported.
He also reportedly said that he didn’t attend the DNC for “two reasons,” noting that he should be harvesting at his farm and because the rock band Pearl Jam “is kind enough to do a little concert…and I’d like to think they did it because I’m up for re-election.”
AFP/Getty Images
The Cook Political Report marks Montana’s race as a “toss up,” and aggregate polls, such as The Hill show a close race, with Sheehy leading Tester by a 2-percentage point margin. Other individual polls have shown Tester leading at times.
Tester is the only Democratic member of the state’s congressional delegation. Trump won Montana in 2020 by 16 points.
Newsweek reached out to Tester’s campaign for comment and confirmation via email on Thursday night.
The Senate is currently controlled by Democrats, who hold 47 seats but four independents caucus with the party, giving them a 51-seat majority, while Republicans hold 49. November’s election could change control of the chamber, and Montana’s Senate race is being closely watched as a potential tipping point.
With the GOP widely expected to flip the West Virginia seat held by outgoing independent Senator Joe Manchin, the results of the presidential election between Trump and Harris and the outcome of the Montana Senate race could be deciding factors for how the next Congress operates.
The presidential race is also neck-and-neck with several aggregate polls showing Harris leading in the national vote but in a deadlock with former President Trump in battleground states.
However, the popular vote does not necessarily translate to the 270 Electoral College votes needed to clinch the White House.
State polls, especially swing and battleground states, are often more reflective of how a candidate might secure the necessary votes to win the White House.
Follow Newsweek‘s live DNC blog for updates here.
Update 8/22/24 at 9:25 p.m. ET: This article has been updated to include additional context.
-
Ohio1 week ago
Ohio taxpayers sent families $966 million for private school tuition: Capitol Letter
-
Minnesota6 days ago
Readers and writers: Plenty of thrills and danger in these Minnesota author’s mysteries
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago
‘Veeranjaneyulu Viharayatra’ movie review: A journey steeped in bitter-sweet memories
-
Politics1 week ago
Police ally of scandal-ridden Mayor Tiffany Henyard indicted on bankruptcy fraud charges
-
Politics1 week ago
Harris dodging flip-flop attacks as faceless surrogates flip on key positions: 'Playing politics'
-
News1 week ago
Tracking the Swing States for Harris and Trump
-
News1 week ago
Video: Biden and Harris Announce Deal to Lower Drug Prices
-
Politics1 week ago
Video: President Biden Announces $150 Million in Cancer Research Grants