The Flathead Valley’s Leading Independent Journal of Observation, Analysis, & Opinion

 

14 August 2011

Stutz joins field seeking Democratic nomination for Congress

Rob Stutz

On 10 August, Rob Stutz, chief legal counsel for the 2011 Montana Legislature, a bright guy who knows a jackboot on the constitution when he sees one, and exasperated and concerned by a Republican Party that probably introduced more unconstitutional legislation in the 2011 Montana Legislature than in any previous session, announced his candidacy (verbatim news release) for the Democratic nomination for Montana’s sole seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

In his own words, here’s why he’s running:

When the people have spoken on an issue, Montana’s Representative in Congress should reflect the will of the people, not undermine it. As a Representative, I would not ignore citizen initiatives or disregard our state and federal Constitutions.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

…members of Congress should be influenced by the best interests of the people they represent, not by the most partisan voices or the institutions with the largest bank accounts.

♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦

Stutz is a Democrat because the Montana Democratic Party best protects the individual freedoms enshrined in our state and federal Constitutions. Stutz states, “The Montana Democratic Party embraces Montana values like fiscal responsibility, open government, and the right of privacy. I will make sure that Washington D.C. understands our values.



Now there are four, and there will be more

He joins State Senator Kim Gillan, State Representative Franke Wilmer, and Missoula city councilman David Strohmaier in seeking the seat Denny Rehberg is vacating to challenge incumbent Democratic U.S. Senator Jon Tester. He’s not likely to be the last, as additional serious candidates may join the race, and there are sure to be some soapbox candidates.

This should be interesting.

Stutz, 39, is the youngest of the candidates — a generation younger than Gillan and Wilmer — and never having run for office, the least experienced politically. That’s a handicap initially, and especially in a low turnout primary that old line liberals and public employee unions will dominate, but it will be an advantage if he gets the nomination: he’s a fresh face, seems to have fresh ideas, has the energy of youth, and I think he’ll appeal to voters who are fed up with the tea party’s mean spirited selfishness and the Democratic establishment’s timorousness.

Stutz has four immediate problems:

He won’t get much, if any, help from Democratic activists with ties to the Democratic establishment, so he’ll have to run as an insurgent, as a guerrilla, relying on campaign kids and outsiders with ties to moveon.org and similar organizations. Provided he develops a powerful, compelling message, and an effective way of delivering it, his operation will be part political campaign, part movement, and could be a lot of fun for the idealists who work for him and with him.


Primary winner not likely to receive a majority

That’s a problem with this race. Just 25 percent plus one vote wins the nomination. That encourages pandering to constitutiencies that can mobilize their members. Candidates who can win the general election but who fail to kiss up to the unions, or fail to play identity politics, risk losing the primary.

There are two remedies for this that I find acceptable.

One requires a majority or minimum percentage plurality (for example, 40 percent) for victory. If that requirement is not met, a runoff election between the candidates with the highest and next highest vote totals decides the winner.

The other alternative for a contest with three or more candidates for one office is an instant runoff ballot using the single transferrable vote principle (See Gaming the Vote, by William Poundstone). Voters mark their first and subsequent choices on their ballots. If one candidate receives a majority of first place votes on the first round of counting, he wins. If he does not, the candidate with the lowest total of first place votes is eliminated, and the second place votes are added to the first place totals of the other candidates. This process repeats itself until one candidate receives a majority. If at the end there is a tie, it is broken by a process agreed to before the election.