HELENA – A new political group, a state senator and a businessman asked the Montana Supreme Court on Monday to remove Initiative 166 from the November general election ballot, calling it “a sham.”

Montanans Opposed to I-166, state Sen. Dave Lewis, R-Helena, and Phil Lilleberg of Billings, owner of FP Inc., filed the petition against Attorney General Steve Bullock and Secretary of State Linda McCulloch. Helena attorneys Chris J. Gallus and James E. Brown wrote the petition.

I-166 is a nonbinding policy statement that says corporations aren’t people and money isn’t political speech. If passed, it directs Montana’s congressional delegation to support a federal constitutional amendment to undo the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision that removed barriers and allowed corporations and unions to spend unrestricted money in political campaigns.

It surfaced earlier this year when Montana’s 1912 ban on corporate spending on independent expenditures in elections was under legal attack by American Tradition Partnership. The U.S. Supreme Court last month struck down the Montana law as unconstitutional.

The group and individuals asked the Supreme Court to determine that I-166 “is not legally sufficient to appear on the state’s general election ballot, and that the statements prepared for the petition and the ballot do not meet the requirements of (state law).” They urged the court to strike the measure from the ballot and declare all petitions submitted on the proposed measure void.

“At its best, I-166 is an odd mixture of resolution, law constitutional amendment and revision, and as such, is not properly before the people for their vote,” the petition said. “I-166 is, quite simply put, a sham or a poll presented in a manner not comporting with law.”

***

In response, the sponsors of I-166 blasted the challenge, saying corporations will stop at nothing to block the measure.

“We are mad as hell,” said C.B. Pearson of Missoula, treasurer of Stand with Montanans: Corporations Aren’t People – Ban Corporate Campaign Spending. “This lawsuit is nothing more than corporate hired guns trying to deny the people of Montana a chance to vote on a citizens’ initiative, one that clearly states corporations aren’t people and money is not speech.”

The real question, Pearson said, is who’s funding this “frivolous lawsuit.” He said it smells like the tactics of the Anaconda Copper Mining Co., when the former company used its “thugs to silence the people of Montana” and its money to buy elections.

Meanwhile, those trying to remove the ballot measure contended that the attorney general’s determination that I-166 is legally sufficient is erroneous on these three grounds:

• The measure “requires elected officials to vote in a certain way and dictates or predetermines specific results.”

• It “acts as a resolution to require proposal of an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.”

• And I-166 “effectively, and is indeed an amendment and revision to the constitution of the state of Montana, which violates the rule against multiple amendments in a single vote.”

Lewis said state Senate Majority Leader Jeff Essmann, R-Billings, asked him if he would be willing to be a plaintiff in the lawsuit. Lewis said he agreed because of his concerns about the measure from the start.

“I’m just not sure as an elected official what the heck kind of obligation this puts on me the next session,” Lewis said in a phone interview. “What am I supposed to do with this? It’s kind of a gotcha deal.”

As of Monday, Pearson said the signature count for 1-166 was nearing 32,000, with 5 percent of the voters signing petitions in 61 of 100 of the state’s House districts. To qualify, it needed 24,337 total signatures, as well as those from 5 percent of the voters in 34 House districts.

Missoulian State Bureau reporter Charles S. Johnson can be reached at (406) 447-4066 or at chuck.johnson@lee.net.

(9) comments

libertarian
libertarian

Does Pearson want to have Montana Voters, vote on some ballot measures, while not being allowed to vote on other ballot measures?

MDaniels
MDaniels

This is really the beginning of the end when a handful of people, acting with corporate interests, can decided what the people can put on the ballot.

walter12
walter12

The Montana leftists love their union dues going to leftist candidates and to Obama but by God, they hate it when the other side gives money.

lovethezootown
lovethezootown

Actually, the Citizens United decision applies to both corporations and unions. Hence, overturning CU would apply to both as well. So, Walter12, do you support secret, unlimited money (from corporations/unions) buying elections, or do you support I-166 and what it stands for - only citizens can spend money in campaigns, governments should be allowed to limit contributions, and campaign finance should be transparent? Which side do you stand on?

Lyle
Lyle

Unions are just as bad. The unions spend as much as corp. They both try to buy elections!

js350454
js350454

OK Lyle: I agree with you that we should limit all money in politics... But the difference between the "scary" unions and the multinational billionaires (Romney) and corporations is that the unions spend money to elect patriotic leaders who fight to keep jobs in the USA while providing a decent living wage to American workers. They spend money to elect Americans who want to export more USA made goods than import foreign products. They spend their money electing Americans that fight to improve healthcare and protect our teachers and fight to provide a safe environment to raise our families. The multinational billionaires (Romney) and corporations spend their money to elect politicians that are puppets only to their bottom line dollar and do not support the hard working American family. Its your choice. But I agree, our country would be better served if we were to limit all money in politics... it would force the truth out of our elected officials and a conservative republican would never be elected again.

whatsupwiththat
whatsupwiththat

Republican mantra, “silence the people.”

Alan Johnson
Alan Johnson

What they are afraid of is that the overwhelming majority of Montana voters who will vote for I-166 will also remember that Republican candidates such as Dennjy Rehberg and Rick Lewis supported the US Supreme Court when it struck down Montana's 100-year old law.

Jeanne Deau
Jeanne Deau

Interesting how the far-right is always in favor of "state's rights" until they actually attempt to assert those rights...case in point, Montana's attempt to strike down the obscenity known as "corporate personhood."

I do not fear my government - I am only very disappointed in it and angry because it has allowed itself to be castrated by global corporate interests to the point that it can no longer protect us from the excesses of unbridled, uncontrolled crapitalists. The lawmakers in CON-gress the five "justices" on the SCrOTUS who are selling us all out are guilty of TREASON - and should be dealt with like any other traitors.

If we'd had this bunch in charge in DC back in 1941, we'd all be speaking Japanese today...

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.