In a recent Frontier Institute piece on Montana’s budget growth, Kendall Cotton argued that we need clear, fair ways to measure state spending. I agree – because transparency builds trust.
While I align with Kendall’s advocacy for limited government, his analysis here misses the mark. By treating transfers between state accounts as direct spending, it inflates the numbers and overlooks real fiscal stewardship. Let’s break it down with some Montana common sense.
Imagine you’re a farmer setting aside part of your wheat check for a new tractor or shop roof repair. That’s not spending – it’s preparing for the future. You haven’t bought anything yet; you’ve just moved money so it can earn interest. The same goes for a small business owner socking away profits for equipment upgrades or tough times.
That’s exactly what the legislature does with the Fire Suppression Account, the Growth and Opportunity (GO) Trust, and the state’s rainy-day fund. We transfer state dollars into these accounts to prepare for fighting wildfires, weathering downturns without raising taxes, or maintaining infrastructure like bridges, water systems, sewers, and dams. This saves taxpayers money in the long run. These aren’t “slush funds” – they’re savings set aside for defined purposes.
That’s why the Legislative Fiscal Division’s Biennial Comparison excludes these transfers when it calculates spending growth. It only counts appropriations, or money actually spent. By this consistent, official measure, Montana’s biennial budget grew less than 0.7% annually – well below inflation. That’s fiscal discipline.
So where does the Frontier Institute’s 13.5% growth figure come from? It comes from a report that counts money as spent simply because it was moved into savings. That’s like saying your family’s expenses spiked just because you shifted money from checking into savings – even if you didn’t spend a dime.
That’s a warped picture. What matters to Montanans is how taxpayer dollars are actually used. When measured correctly, the record shows fiscal discipline and responsibility.
And savings trusts like the GO Trust are vital. Modeled after North Dakota’s Legacy Fund, it uses interest earnings – not the principal – to offset taxpayer costs. North Dakota’s fund now covers about $1,600 in property taxes per homeowner each year. Montana’s GO Trust is designed the same way: easing burdens indirectly through infrastructure and directly with property tax relief. That’s how we spend some, save some, invest some, and return some to taxpayers. We’re not growing government – we’re reducing the long-term burden on Montanans.
Let’s not confuse investment-oriented saving with reckless spending. We’ve cut more than $1 billion in income and property taxes, built strong reserves, and invested in rural hospitals and education – all while keeping budget growth minimal. That’s prudent, solutions-driven conservatism that tackles Montana’s real challenges, which don’t wear party labels.
While better is always possible, we shouldn’t change the measuring stick to fit a narrative. Montanans deserve fiscal policy rooted in facts, not flash, because that’s how we keep government accountable and taxpayers first.
Llew Jones is a Republican state representative from Conrad. He is the chair of the House Appropriations Committee.