Never miss a post. Subscribe today.


When You Thought Steve Daines Couldn’t Be More of a Partisan Hack…

Despite the Missoulian’s odd effort to headline this story in a way that suggests Representative Daines is some kind of a bipartisan leader, you simply must read their take on Steve Daines refusing to support a bill designed to stop government shutdowns, a bill he co-sponsored and introduced, simply because it is being supported by Democrats.

Back in March, Daines was one of eleven members of the House to introduce a bill entitled H.R. 1164: Government Shutdown Prevention Act.  The purpose of the bill was to ensure that the government keep functioning in the event of an impasse like the one now created by House Republicans.

Today, though, Daines is more beholden to the rigidly ideological wing of the Republican Party, and won’t support Democratic efforts to pass the bill. According to the Missoulian:

Daines wants no part of the Democrats’ petition.

“The short answer to that is, like many things, it’s a political gimmick,” said Alee Lockman, Daines’ spokeswoman.

The Government Shutdown Prevention Act was an attempt to avoid government shutdowns, which Daines supports, Lockman said. But being forced to the House floor by the minority party, the bill doesn’t stand a chance. The bill’s primary sponsor, Rep. James Lankford, R-Okla., also opposes the Democrats’ petition.

In English, Daines is opposing the move by the Democrats because he is more interested in protecting John Boehner’s flank than the communities that depend on national park tourism, the veterans who depend on claims being processed, and Montanans who believe that the federal government should serve its citizens.

Back in October 2012, the Missoulian chose to endorse Representative Daines, arguing that he would be a statesman who would work to represent all Montanans. They wrote:

He is prepared to do this for every community in Montana, all the while working to build coalitions across every divide. In a recent meeting with the Missoulian’s editorial board, Daines explained his thinking that members of Congress should fight hard for what they believe is right, but always while demonstrating statesmanship.

I hope someone reminds them during the next Daines campaign, that statesmen don’t put party politics ahead of the state they are meant to represent and that coalition builders don’t oppose their own legislation because the opposition party endorses it.

If you appreciate an independent voice holding Montana politicians accountable and informing voters, and you can throw a few dollars a month our way, we would certainly appreciate it.

About the author

Don Pogreba

Don Pogreba has been writing about Montana politics since 2005 and teaching high school English since 2000. He's a former debate coach, and loyal, if often sad, fan of the San Diego Padres and Portland Timbers. He spends far too many hours of his life working at school and on his small business, Big Sky Debate.
His work has appeared in Politico and Rewire.
In the past few years, travel has become a priority, whether it's a road trip to some little town in Montana or a museum of culture in Ísafjörður, Iceland.


Click here to post a comment

Please enter an e-mail address

  • Stevey boy goes the way he gets blowed by the wind………and the Kockh brothers! Sad, sad representative from our great state.

  • It’s hardly an original thought–many people have sponsored proposals to automatically continue appropriations from previous years, but they never pass because of fears it would give one side too much leverage. Democrats generally think the next year’s spending should automatically be set to grow with inflation. Republicans generally think the next year’s spending should be the same as the previous year’s, so it would be eroded by inflation over time. Daines’ bill is even more conservative than the typical Republican fare: spending would decrease even below the previous year’s levels. Rather than ending government shutdowns, the bill would give Republicans even more incentive to refuse to negotiate, as government spending would automatically be cut 4% a year if they simply didn’t agree to pass anything. The bill strengthens the bargaining position of conservative Republicans and looks like reponsible stewardship: Of course Daines would like it!

    Not that Democrats actually plan to support anything close to Daines’ bill. For procedural reasons, they just a need an on-topic bill that’s been waiting in a committee for a least 30 days. But Democrats would amend the bill to be a “clean CR”–automatically extending the last year’s funding at current levels, stripping out the automatic budget cuts.

    • Reverse Robin Hood looks like responsible stewardship ONLY to the inbreds who don’t understand that they’re gonna get screwed REAL good for the privilege of wearing period costumes while screaming and foaming at the mouth at the black dude! It’s basically conservative PC. It’s not politically correct any more to wear the white sheets and hoods, so the next best thing is a George Washington hat with tea bags on it! And really, when you think about it, which is scarier, a hooded klansman, or a big fat broad in a tri-cornered hat foaming and slobbering at you? Me, personally, I’ll take my chances with the klan!

  • p.s. My greatest hope is that the Dems are playing rope a dope with the Pubbies. Remember rope a dope? The greatest, Muhammad Ali, used it against George Foreman in the Rumble in the Jungle. Great fight. Great strategy! Ali probably should have lost, but he didn’t because he had a shrewd strategy. He knew that he couldn’t punch it out with Foreman, for Foreman is a brute of a man. He was much stronger physically than Ali. So, what Ali did was to all0w George to punch away until he had nothing left! Brilliant! George pounded on Ali until he was exhausted, then, Ali simply took control of the fight!

    Now, let’s suppose that the Dems use the rope a dope strategy too. Let’s say that they just pretend to run this Walsh guy.. Great strategy. Daines smells a blood in the water. He senses that he can win this thing, so he jumps in with both feet and declares for the senate thereby opening up his house seat. What could possibly go wrong? The Pubbies would then hammer Walsh all the way through the primaries and nearly up to election time. Then, THEN, just about a month before the election, Walsh pulls out for personal reasons. Maybe he finds Jaysus or sumthin’, and IN jumps Schweitzer! Wow! The Pubbies woud NOT have enough strenght left to punch away at Schweitzer, and just like the Ali/Foreman fight, they would have punched themselves out of steam! Brilliant. I luv it. I hope the Dims have thought about this. Schweitzer would not even have to campaign. The ONLY thing he would have to do is start looking for a place to live in D.C., or maybe Virginia! Go Brian!

  • Yep. I also believe that this is what lil’ stevey wonderdaines is attempting to do. He simply doesn’t CARE about defaulting. Why? He’s a good little fella wearing his Kockh collar proudly. Lil’ stevey is NOT one of us. He’s a lil’ Kochk! Scary, scary stuff goin’ down, and I don’t think that most Americans in sound bite Murca even understand what is at stake.

    • They done Judy MARTSED themselves right outta existence! Too bad. Guess that folks ain’t ready to replace Uncle Same with Uncle Kockh!…..just yet anyways.

Send this to a friend