|
May 26, 2005
State Employees
Union Leads $4.7 Million Lobbying List: Spring Creek
Lodge Among Top Spending Montana Lobbyists
May 27, 2005
By BOB ANEZ
HELENA -- A union
representing state employees and school teachers throughout Montana
topped the list of lobbyist spending during the 2005 Legislature,
according to a report compiled by the state political practices
office.
MEA-MFT, formed through the
merger of the Montana Education Association and Montana Federation
of Teachers, spent $148,082 during the 90-day session, where the
need to overhaul the state's school funding system and demand for a
significant pay raise for state workers were two major issues.
PPL Montana, which bought
the dams and other power generation plants once owned by Montana
Power Co., was a close second in spending at $146,494.
The union and the energy
company also led all lobbyist spending in the 2003 Legislature. This
year their combined spending increased $112,450, or almost 62
percent.
The figures are based on
reports submitted to the political practices commissioner by the
deadline of last Monday.
In all, 411 special-interest
groups and state and local governments spent $4.78 million to try to
influence legislation. That is the equivalent of about $31,900 per
lawmaker.
The total spending is nearly
47 percent more than the $3.2 million spent in the 2003 Legislature.
Lobbyists spent $3.1 million during the 2001 session and $3.5
million in the 1999 Legislature.
Eric Feaver, MEA-MFT
president, said Friday his organization's spending is no surprise
since the union was a leader in the push for a revamped school
funding process and in securing a salary increase for state
government employees after a nearly two-year freeze in pay.
While satisfied with the
raise, Feaver said he is disappointed the Legislature did not
complete a rewrite of school finances and will need a special
session in December to finish the chore.
"If things break the way we
hope they do, this session will have been a success," he said.
"We're still waiting to see how we come out."
The union incurred
significant expense in preparing legislation that would have created
a $46 million state health insurance program for school employees,
he said. It also brought to Helena 200 union members from every
legislative district in the state to meet personally with their
lawmakers for two days in February, Feaver said.
"That is a big event and
rather pricey," he said.
The Legislature had 59 bills
dealing with education.
Energy issues did not get
the same attention as school funding, but those involved in the
industry had 37 bills to follow. The measures included ones
addressing water rights of dam owners, promotion of wind energy,
state purchase of power-generating dams, further tinkering with
electric deregulation and taxation of energy facilities.
Energy-related companies and
trade organizations spent a total of about $534,000 on their
lobbying efforts. Public health and health-care groups spent about
$505,000, and education organizations spent about $252,000.
State agencies spent about
$150,600 to promote or fight legislation, slightly less than the
$152,000 they spent to lobby the 2003 session. The Department of
Environmental Quality, at $26,418, topped the list of state
agencies.
Local governments --
counties, cities and schools -- spent about $134,192 on lobbying.
Missoula County was the top spender at $30,804.
Following MEA-MFT and PPL
Montana, the biggest overall spenders were the Montana Association
of Realtors, $75,944; Montana Association of Counties, $67,844;
American Heart Association, $61,036; Fidelity Exploration &
Production Co., $60,670; Spring Creek Lodge, $56,677; Montana
Farm Bureau Federation, $55,665; Montana School Boards Association,
$54,595; and Deaconess Billings Clinic, $54,037.
|
