A reality based independent journal of observation & analysis, serving the Flathead Valley & Montana since 2006. © James Conner.
That question, raised when she said, “I did what I came to do, and I think I was successful, and now it’s time to move to a new post and take that fiery, fierce advocacy to an area where it’s specifically tailored to student learning,” was partly answered in a new post by Montana Cowgirl:
…there were some whispers about how she was not happy with her job because it was a bit empty of serious policy work, McLean having come from the Board of Regents and a major figure in education policy. It is true the the job of LG is light on substance. It is a job in which you fill in for the Governor if he can’t be somewhere. That’s just reality and if it’s true that this is the reason McLean left, then it is probably for the better. Hopefully her new gig (with a $20,000 annual raise) will be more along the lines of what she wants.
A person with long experience in Montana politics told me much the same thing:
Shortly after assuming the position of Lt Gov, McLean and Bullock had a falling out over differences regarding her role in the administration. Apparently Angela believed she was going to share in the exercise of executive authority or be delegated certain authorities that she alone would exercise at her discretion. This assumption was at odds with Steve’s belief (and, to be fair, most other Governors) that the role of the Lt Gov was to support the Governor and perform largely ceremonial/ ministerial tasks.
There’s not now much doubt that McLean misunderstood, and badly misunderstood, what a lieutenant governor does. But how could that have happened? Surely she studied Montana’s Constitution and knew that the lieutenant governor has no power independent of the governor. Surely she understood she was to be Bullock’s cheerleader and understudy. Surely she understood that because surely she met with Bullock at length to discuss the situation before she was appointed to the office.
Did McLean lie to Bullock? Did she lie to herself? Did Bullock lie to her? Did his staff lie to her? Did Bullock’s apparent indifference to the office, her ambition, and her background, and his, in authoritarian bureaucracies (justice and education), create an atmosphere in which a horrible conflict became inevitable? I think the answer will emerge, but possibly in the worst possible way: in bits and pieces stretched out over time, like Hillary Clinton’s email saga.
It’s also necessary to ask whether the legal troubles of McLean’s father-in-law contributed to the decision to oust her as lieutenant governor. There’s no evidence she was involved, but I suspect the situation made Bullock’s political people more than a little nervous.
Ultimately, however, the person responsible for the situation is Bullock. Perhaps McLean was the wrong person for the job, but he chose her. Either he failed to do due diligence, or he ignored red flags. Now he has to choose a third lieutenant governor. If he doesn’t get it right this time, he could be a one-term governor.