Following the second U.S. House debate between Republican Ryan Zinke and Democrat John Lewis, two press releases landed in my inbox offering two very different narratives of what exactly happened the night of Sept. 29 in Billings.
One read: “Zinke wins debate; Lewis shows lack of experience and knowledge.” It then explained that Zinke “exhibited a breadth and depth of knowledge that his opponent John Lewis clearly lacked.”
The other read: “Lewis wins the Billings debate: This race is about the future of Montana.” The release began, “Montana’s John Lewis delivered a decisive win tonight championing issues Montanans care about most from Medicare to education, to energy and Montana agriculture jobs.”
Each of these, of course, was sent from the candidate’s respective campaigns declaring theirs a debate champion. Let’s just say both of them are winners, which each again declared following the third debate.
Most of us don’t watch political debates, unless they involve presidential candidates. After all, statewide and local forums don’t include those nifty real-time debate results, where a couple dozen people turn a dial to determine when a candidate is annoying or resonating with them. Instead, we read the synopsis of the forum in the media, for better or worse.
We are less than a month away from the election and, at least among the high-profile races, we are largely left with sound bites, many of which are printed on the campaign signs flanking our busiest thoroughfares. “For Montana,” “More Leadership, Less Politics,” “More Jobs, Less Government.” They’re appealing, even if they say very little about how each candidate would achieve those results.
Determining how, exactly, candidates in the biggest races would affect me (with their handlers keeping them on message and constant advertisements directing voters to flaws in their opponents) is next to impossible.
So, when someone asks me about politics, I almost immediately shift the conversation to local issues I care more about. Broad political topics lead to broad political arguments and often have less of an effect on one’s city or pocketbook than those smaller races we overlook.
Yes, the U.S. House and Senate races matter. But of equal importance are proposals to increase mill levies to pay for emergency medical services in Kalispell and another to create a special emergency communications district to pay for the 911 Center. Then there’s the race for Flathead County commissioner, a statewide initiative that would eliminate same-day voter registration, and a number of races for state Legislature, the results of which will determine how Montana’s budget is spent over the next two years. How those races shake out will likely have a more noticeable and immediate impact on Flathead Valley residents than those at the top of the ticket.
During next year’s Legislative Session, state lawmakers will be voting on how to fund our schools, whether to expand Medicaid, how to develop the state’s natural resources, and whether to cut taxes. Those politicians will shape the identity of this state far more than Washington, D.C. and their decisions will have an outsized impact on our backyards.
Ballots have already been mailed to thousands of Montanans. The vast majority of voters already know whom they will vote for in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House races. We’ve seen their commercials, heard their sound bites and, even with more debates scheduled, the narrative is unlikely to change.
It’s those smaller races that will shape this region and the rest of the state for years to come, and they shouldn’t be overlooked.