I live in Montana and this is the way I see it. Anti-mining, anti-logging and anti-ranching crusades by so-called environmentalists are big money makers for these groups. The more sensational the crusade, the more money is raised. The objective appears to be to make Montana a playground for the rich and famous and to eliminate the resource based industries. Not so long ago Montana ranked in the top ten among the states in terms of per capita average wage. It now ranks #50.
In 1996 a citizens initiative made the ballot (I-122). Basically it set up a high standard for water quality discharges from metal mines alone. Other industries, municipal sewage systems, national parks etc. were exempt. (Yellowstone Park is the #1 source of air and water pollution in Montana) Polls showed the initiative would pass by about 60% to 40%. ("Are you in favor of clean water/ vote yes on I-122") After intense campaigning, education and shellacking the proponents in open debates, the mining industry and their supporters were able to reverse this to about 40/60 on election day.
Also in 96 a little publicized initiative passed that forbade campaigning by anyone with a financial interest in the question (this included employees and their families as well as corporations). As you have stated, this was declared unconstitutional 10 days before the election.
Also, in the 96 campaign, Clinton expropriated the Crown Butte deposit of Battle Mountain Gold, without consultation with the people or government of Montana. When I-137, the citizens initiative to ban the use of cyanide in new open pit mines (or expand existing ones)was passed it was the final straw. The mining industry packed their packsacks and headed for more friendly parts of the world. Only those with existing production operations stayed. Not a single exploration geologist was at work in Montana.
The economy of the state has continued to flounder. Even tourism (which promises seasonal jobs at minimum wage)has turned down after 9/11. People are starting to put two and two together as to the wisdom of chasing away all the high paying resource sector jobs.
Traditionally, the Democrats have supported the anti-mining bills and initiatives. Missoula and Bozeman (LA North)have been traditional Dem strongholds led by newly arrived activists (seen to be Californians leading to the "Don't Californicate Montana" bumper stickers). Butte, a strong labor town, is another Dem stronghold. It is particularly encouraging to see Debbie Shea, a Butte Democrat leading the charge to overturn I-137.
Many believe I-137 was conceived specifically to stop the Canyon Resources 7-Up Pete project. The Blackfoot River flowing close by joins with the Clark Fork just upstream from Missoula. The Missoula activists are still against the project. However, people in the area of the proposed mine have always been very strongly in favor of it.
The campaign to overturn I-137 should be a cakewalk, going by the I-122 results and the increased anti Ted Turner, anti Californian, anti starving to death sentiments now present in the state. However, the campaign against I-122 had a much larger mining industry base from which to draw monetary and organizational support. I-122 also was opposed by a very popular (+80% support)governor (Marc Racicot, now chairman of the RNC). Unfortunately, the present governor is unpopular.
All in all, I would bet on I-137 being overturned. |
