Montanans in Action details donors in settlement over 2006 ballot measure support

2010-11-17T21:15:00Z Montanans in Action details donors in settlement over 2006 ballot measure supportBy MIKE DENNISON Missoulian State Bureau
November 17, 2010 9:15 pm  • 

HELENA - A Montana group that financed three conservative ballot measures in 2006 has settled a long-running dispute with the state's chief campaign cop, agreeing to disclose the source of $1.2 million used to support the measures.

Montanans in Action, based in Winifred, agreed last Friday to settle a lawsuit filed by Commissioner of Political Practices Dennis Unsworth, who said it violated Montana laws requiring disclosure of donors behind political spending.

Unsworth on Wednesday called the settlement "a ringing endorsement of disclosure," and said Montanans have made it clear through their laws that they want to know who's behind political spending.

In documents filed with the settlement, Montanans in Action revealed that nearly all the money it used to support the ballot measures came from groups that Unsworth said are associated with New York real estate developer Howard Rich - a prominent supporter of conservative, Libertarian causes.

Unsworth began investigating the group in 2006, in response to a complaint by Helena lawyer Jonathan Motl. Unsworth ruled in 2009 that Montanans in Action had violated disclosure laws and filed suit two months later to enforce his ruling.

He said Wednesday the group settled the case, including payment of a $75,000 penalty, because it knew it faced a difficult court battle over the disclosure issue.

But the group's chairman, Trevis Butcher, said Wednesday his group had done nothing wrong and agreed to settle only because it had tired of a lengthy legal battle.

When Unsworth decided to lower the penalty to $75,000, "all of the parties involved decided this was a complete waste of money to take this even further."

"If they'd had a single leg to stand on, they'd have (pursued us further) in court," he said. "They're bailing on this one."

Butcher also blasted Unsworth as a "political appointee with an agenda," and said the commissioner should be replaced with a bipartisan commission.

Unsworth was appointed by Gov. Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat; his term expires this year and he cannot be reappointed. Unsworth enforces a broad variety of campaign and ethics laws, and has ruled against Democrats, including Schweitzer, and Republicans in ethics cases.


Motl, who filed the original complaint against Montanans in Action, said Montanans were "well-served by our commissioner and the attorney general to get this resolved" and force disclosure of the group's campaign donors.

He also called Montanans in Action a "cancer on the political system," because it blatantly violated disclosure laws and forced the state to use hundreds of hours and thousands of dollars to enforce those laws.

"They had an obligation to come into this state and be open about where the money was coming from and how the money was being spent, and complying with the law on those sources," Motl said. "They shouldn't be in there disrespecting the political system and trying to manipulate it for their own benefit, and costing it money."

Butcher declined to respond to Motl's comments.

Montanans in Action, formed in 2006, routed $1.2 million to ballot committees that backed a trio of measured that sought to limit state spending, make it easier to recall judges and protect certain property rights.

The money helped pay for signature-gathering efforts to qualify the measures for the 2006 ballot. But the measures were later removed from the ballot by a state district judge who found that "pervasive fraud" occurred during the signature-gathering process.

Montanans in Action had refused to disclose its financial supporters, saying it was a "social-welfare" group under federal law and not a political committee.

As part of the settlement, the group filed a detailed list of its donors during the 2006 campaign season. It reported receiving $909,000 from America at its Best, a group with a Kalispell post office box; $185,000 from the New York-based Democracy Fund; $100,000 from Colorado at its Best; $25,000 from U.S. Term Limits; and $20,000 from Liberty Oil of Denver.

The website for America at its Best said the group exists to "help assist citizens in achieving their goals of making government smaller and open."

Unsworth said only one-fourth of 1 percent of the funding for the ballot measures, run through Montanans in Action, came from in-state sources. Most of the remainder came from groups associated with Rich, he said.

"Even though anonymous campaigning has spread like weeds, disclosure law still comes down on the side of voters and their right to know who's trying to influence their vote," he said. "The law, intended to thwart corruption in the electoral process, is as important now as it has ever been."

Missoulian State Bureau reporter Mike Dennison can be reached at 1-800-525-4920 or at


Copyright 2015 All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

No Comments Posted.

Missoulian Civil Dialogue Policy

Civil Dialogue Policy for Commenting on

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Comments can only be submitted by registered users. By posting comments on our site, you are agreeing to the following terms:

Commentary and photos submitted to the Missoulian ( may be published or distributed in print, electronically or other forms. Opinions expressed in's comments reflect the opinions of the author, and are not necessarily the opinions of the Missoulian or its parent company. See the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Our guidelines prohibit the solicitation of products or services, the impersonation of another site user, threatening or harassing postings and the use of vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language, defamatory or illegal material. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability or other classification. It's fine to criticize ideas, but ad hominem attacks on other site users are prohibited. Users who violate those standards may lose their privileges on

You may not post copyrighted material from another publication. (Link to it instead, using a headline or very brief excerpt.)

No short policy such as this can spell out all possible instances of material or behavior that we might deem to be a violation of our publishing standards, and we reserve the right to remove any material posted to the site.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick