Freedom Scores 2024

Montana Libertarian Party Unveils Legislative Scorecard Highlighting Champions of Liberty

The Montana Libertarian Party is proud to announce the release of our legislative scorecard, a comprehensive evaluation of candidates and their commitment to liberty and individual freedoms. This initiative underscores our dedication to transparency and accountability in the political process.

Why a Scorecard? In an era where political rhetoric often overshadows genuine policy positions, the Montana Libertarian Party believes it is crucial to provide voters with clear, objective assessments of candidates' stances on key issues. We always put principles above party and want to build bridges for future issue coalitions.

Our scorecard is designed to highlight those who align with our principles of limited government, personal freedom, and fiscal responsibility, regardless of party, with the hope that all parties in our great state may adopt libertarian ideals. The candidates are scored on a sclae from 1 through 5. With 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest Freedom Score.

Key Issues Evaluated

Our evaluation was based on responses to a detailed questionnaire that included critical issues such as:

• Ending the Federal Reserve: A stance advocating for the dissolution of the Federal Reserve to restore monetary control to the people.

• Opposition to Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC): Resisting state-level implementation of CBDCs to protect financial privacy and freedom.

• Defend the Guard Act: Supporting state-based legislation to prohibit the deployment of Montana National Guard troops overseas without an official declaration of war by Congress.

• Opposition to Foreign Aid: Recognizing that the national debt is nearly $35 trillion and that the United States cannot afford to fund other countries and their wars, whether it is Ukraine, Israel, or Taiwan

• Government Surveillance: Advocating for bills that protect citizens from unwarranted government intrusion and surveillance.

Highlighting Key State Legislative Races

The scorecard also sheds light on several crucial legislative races, emphasizing candidates who align closely with libertarian values:

Jennifer Carlson and Caleb Hinkle Primary: Both of these candidates are significantly more aligned with our principles than their opponents (one of whom Governor Gianforte has endorsed). Jennifer Carlson, for instance, supported HB 37, a bill that would have required Child Protective Services (CPS) to obtain a warrant before removing children from their parents outside of emergency situations. If Governor Gianforte had not vetoed this bill, it likely would have prevented the awful Kolstad case, which is ongoing. This bill underscores Carlson’s commitment to protecting parental rights and due process. She also supported the Defend the Guard Act. Caleb Hinkle, frequently identifying as a libertarian, cosponsored the Defend the Guard Act and argued for it in committee and on the floor of the House. He supports ending the Federal Reserve and opposes excessive government spending, making him a strong advocate for fiscal responsibility and limited government.

Defending Liberty Advocates

We also want to highlight and defend legislators who are currently facing attacks for their support of the Defend the Guard Act.

Notable among them are:

Lee Deming: As the lead champion of the Defend the Guard Act, he is an important voice for upholding the Constitution and promoting peace and liberty.

Steven Galloway: There are misleading attack ads targeting him for cosponsoring the Defend the Guard Act, claiming that he voted to defund the Montana National Guard. In reality, Rep. Galloway voted to require Congress to declare war and go on record before our Guardsmen are sent to foreign wars.

Lola Sheldon-Galloway: Governor Gianforte has also endorsed her primary opponent. She is termed out of the House and is running in Senate District 13. She stood on principle, believing that we cannot allow the federal government to force Montana to follow along with its unconstitutional abuse of our state sovereignty.

Theresa Manzella: As the leader of the Freedom Caucus, which endorsed the Defend the Guard Act, @TManzella1

staunchly defended the bill in the Senate.

Lukas Schubert: Having endorsed the Defend the Guard Act, @LukasSchubertMT has been attacked by the same PAC that is targeting the above candidates. As a Gen-Z candidate, he represents a bright future for Montana as many younger candidates are aligned with the Montana Libertarian Party on many other issues. Attack ads have targeted these legislators, particularly in Great Falls, for their principled stance on this critical issue. We stand by these legislators for their unwavering commitment to liberty and constitutional governance. These legislators had Montanans in mind when they voted for or voiced support for the bill, and we will always highlight courageous people in other parties when they do the right thing.

Join the Conversation

We invite all Montanans to review our scorecards below and engage in the conversation about the future of our state and nation.

Together, we can ensure that our elected officials remain true to the principles of liberty and limited government.

2024 Freedom Score Candidates

US HOUSE DISTRICT 1 CANDIDATES

Ryan Zinke (R) - Did not respond to request for an interview

Mary Todd (R) - Did not respond to request for an interview

Monica Tranel (D) - Did not respond to request for an interview

US HOUSE DISTRICT 2 CANDIDATES

FREEDOM SCORE 4.5

Top Candidate: Ken Bogner Among the candidates evaluated, he emerged as the top advocate for liberty.

High Freedom Score Issues:

  • Ending the Federal Reserve, prominently featured on his website.
  • He has been vocal in opposing the central bank digital currency at the state level and has sponsored numerous bills aimed at curbing government surveillance.
  • Notably, Bogner was a co-sponsor of the Defend the Guard Act, reinforcing his dedication to ensuring that Montana National Guard troops are not deployed to foreign conflicts without a formal declaration of war by Congress.
  • Having served in the Marines, Bogner understands the real costs of war and believes Congress should put their name on the dotted line before our troops are committed to conflicts in foreign lands.
  • Believes in complete medical freedom.
  • Believes the US should not send one more dime overseas.
  • Supports AIPAC registering as a Foreign Agent.
  • Opposes all mandates and lockdowns for future pandemics.
  • Believes states should ignore any unconstitutional federal laws.
  • Supports voting to abolish the Alphabet Agencies (CIA, FBI, NSA, etc.).
  • Does not support federally funded subsidies.
  • Would like to introduce term limits.

Low Freedom Score Issues:

  • Would like the US to complete our current contracts overseas (until they expire).
  • Believes small arms should not be restricted; however, supports the restriction of large artillery and large weapons of war.

Ric Holden (R)

FREEDOM SCORE 4.3

Ric Holden is a rancher and former State Senator from Dawson County.

High Freedom Score Issues:

  • Believes the US Constitution should be adhered to as understood at ratification.
  • Would like to end all foreign aid and proxy wars.
  • End funding of foreign aid.
  • Not supportive of pandemic lockdowns or mandates.
  • Does not support CBDCs.
  • Supports the Defend the Guard Act.
  • Believes AIPAC should register as a Foreign Agent.
  • Supports the 2nd Amendment and believes the federal government has no right to restrict the ownership of weapons.
  • Believes we can no longer afford to be the world’s police force and wants to bring our troops home.

Low Freedom Score Issues:

  • Does not believe states should ignore unconstitutional laws under the 10th Amendment and would prefer states fight the laws in court.
  • Supports agricultural subsidies.

Kyle Austin (R)

FREEDOM SCORE 3.0

Kyle Austin He says his campaign this year is focused on restoring integrity to government.

High Freedom Score Issues:

  • Does not believe we should have troops overseas without a formal declaration of war.
  • Supports the Defend the Guard Act.
  • Believes the Constitution should be adhered to.
  • Believes AIPAC should register as a foreign agent.
  • Does not support automobile kill-switches.

Low Freedom Score Issues:

  • Believes we should maintain US military bases near North Korea, Russia, and China.
  • Supports using lockdowns in some situations in future pandemics and would like businesses compensated.
  • Supports the funding of building the new FBI building.
  • Believes in farm subsidies.
  • Does not support states ignoring unconstitutional laws.
  • Is 2A; however, feels that the US government should restrict weapons of war.

John Driscoll (D)

FREEDOM SCORE 2.5

John Driscoll is a Helena resident who has previously served as a state legislator, public service commissioner and Montana National Guard officer.

High Freedom Score Issues:

  • Supports the Defend the Guard Act.
  • Would like to see Montana not being used as a “Nuclear Sponge.”
  • Supports ending all conflicts overseas where a formal declaration of war has not been declared.
  • Did not support bank bailouts.
  • Does not support giving more funds ($300 million) for the new FBI building.
  • Favors ending foreign aid to Israel.

Low Freedom Score Issues:

  • Would like the US to keep commitments to NATO to protect Ukraine.
  • Does not support H.R. 8421, the “Abolish the Federal Reserve Act.”
  • He is somewhat supportive of automobile kill-switches if it keeps medical costs down.
  • Believes medical professionals need the capability to use mandates or lockdowns if necessary.
  • Open to possible restrictions on weapons of war.
  • Does not support states ignoring unconstitutional laws.
  • Supports subsidies for immature, cyclical, or essential industries.

US SENATE CANDIDATES

Mike Hummert (D)

FREEDOM SCORE 3.8

Mike Hummert is a strong advocate for balanced budgets, a return to the three branches of government working together with separation of powers, and believes strongly in reducing government spending and would like to reduce government surveillance of it’s citizens.

High Freedom Score Issues:

  • Supports the US adhering to the Constitution as understood at ratification.
  • Believes we need to get back to separation of powers and that the three branches need to work together.
  • Would like to end funding of foreign aid and believes it is unreasonable to interfere with other countries' sovereignty.
  • Would like to introduce a Balanced Budget Amendment.
  • Does not support the creation or implementation of a CBDC and believes it will lead to a social credit system.
  • Supports having AIPAC register as a foreign agent under FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act).
  • Would like to reduce the size and funding of the Alphabet Agencies (e.g., CIA, FBI, NSA).
  • Would like to introduce term limits and age limits (74 years) in the Senate.

Low Freedom Score Issues:

  • Does not support abolishing the Federal Reserve until we have something to replace it with.
  • Does not support abolishing legal tender laws so that people can use gold, silver, and cryptocurrencies as currency without capital gains tax.
  • Does not support citizens owning fully automatic weapons and would like to “stay where we are” with current gun laws and regulations.
  • Does not support states ignoring unconstitutional federal laws and would prefer to see states fight them.

Charles Walkingchild (R)

FREEDOM SCORE 3.5

Charles Walkingchild, an Anishinaabe tribal member with Blackfeet heritage, describes himself as a “poor man’s Republican” who wants to wrest Washington from corporate control and restore the U.S. to its basic constitutional principles.

High Freedom Score Issues:

  • Believes the Constitution should be adhered to as understood at ratification.
  • Would like to end foreign aid and supports ending all proxy wars, emphasizing an America First policy.
  • Would like to bring our troops home and does not support military deployments unless there has been a formal declaration of war.
  • Is against CBDCs (Central Bank Digital Currencies) and believes they would lead to intrusion from the Federal Reserve.
  • Supports abolishing legal tender laws so that people can use silver, gold, and cryptocurrencies without capital gains tax implications.
  • Does not support federally mandated kill switches.
  • Does not support federally mandated lockdowns or mandates.
  • Would like to address legislative corruption and have AIPAC register as a foreign agent under FARA (Foreign Agents Registration Act).
  • Believes states should ignore unconstitutional laws under the 10th Amendment.

Low Freedom Score Issues:

  • Supports maintaining military bases outside of Russia and China.
  • Does not support abolishing the Alphabet Agencies (e.g., CIA, FBI, NSA) and would like to see them better regulated.
  • Would like to bring God back into schools.
  • Supports harsher penalties for burning flags and rioting.
  • Would like to see more funds for infrastructure and more investment in our nation’s capital.

Montana Libertarian Party: Engaging in Primary Races to Advance Liberty

As many Montanans have discovered, Libertarian candidates are not appearing on the primary ballots in Montana. The Secretary of State has attributed this to efforts to "save paper."

We are currently investigating this matter. In the meantime, we will not overlook the primary races in the other parties. While this may appear to be a setback, it actually presents a unique opportunity to focus on the broader primary races within other parties.

Despite our absence from the primary ballots, the Montana Libertarian Party remains committed to influencing the entire political landscape. We are taking proactive steps to ensure that the principles of liberty are upheld and promoted across all political spectrums. To this end, we will be distributing comprehensive questionnaires to all primary candidates from other parties.

These questionnaires will cover a range of critical issues, including:

  • Support for Ending the Federal Reserve: We will ask candidates whether they support @RepThomasMassie's legislation to dismantle the Federal Reserve, which facilitates endless government spending, causes inflation, diminishes the purchasing power of Americans, fosters wealth inequality, and spawns economic crises.

  • Opposition to Foreign Funding: Candidates will be queried on their stance regarding the U.S. funding of all foreign nations, including Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. We are nearing $35 trillion in debt and cannot afford to fund other countries. Moreover, Americans should not be forced to pay for wars they do not support.

  • Support for Congress Reclaiming Constitutional War Powers: Congress has not declared war since World War II, yet the President has embroiled the United States in more than a dozen disastrous wars since. Candidates will be asked if they support repealing the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force and whether they would support war powers resolutions to withdraw from current engagements.

  • Support for the Defend the Guard Act: Candidates will be asked whether they support the Montana legislature enacting the Defend the Guard Act, crucial legislation for maintaining state sovereignty and limiting federal overreach that prohibits any deployment of National Guard units into active combat unless Congress has declared war.

Our goal is to identify candidates who align with our core values of liberty and limited government, regardless of their party affiliation. We believe in principles over party lines, and as such, we are prepared to highlight liberty-minded Republicans and Democrats who demonstrate a commitment to our shared ideals.

Each candidate's responses will be carefully evaluated and graded. These grades will be publicly shared to inform voters and promote candidates who prioritize freedom, personal responsibility, and non-interventionist policies.

By engaging in this process, we aim to advance the cause of liberty and ensure that the voices of principled individuals are heard in the upcoming elections. We encourage all Montanans to stay informed, get involved, and support candidates who truly represent the values of freedom and limited government. Together, we can make a difference and steer our state and nation toward a freer, more prosperous future.

MTLP Fights to Keep Ballot Access

Have you ever had someone look you in the eye and lie to you, then stand there looking smug, like you should count yourself honored to be considered important enough to lie to?

I have, outside a committee room at the Montana capitol. I had just finished testifying against a bill intended to make it nigh impossible for the MTLP to get candidates on the ballot. A place we had earned by the hard work of our candidates and volunteers since the 1980s.

That smug face belonged to Greg Hertz, a state senator from Polson. A loyal Republican foot soldier who had won his senate seat unopposed for the second time. This bill (along with 59 others he was primary sponsor for) was going to be a verse in his swan song; he had hit the term limits set by voter initiative in 1992 and wouldn’t be back in the legislature.

Why had he chosen this subject as part of his legacy? Most of his bills were narrow technical tweaks to existing law, having to do with taxes or accounting procedures (an example: SB 16, which would “Revise the distribution period for a Montana farm/ranch risk management account”). Well, he had some help with this homework.

Montana’s junior US Senator Steve Daines was chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which was tasked with taking the Senate for his party. They needed to hold their existing seats, flip one to tie and two to take control, which looked within reach. Montana’s other Senator, Jon Tester (a Democrat) was running for his fourth term after three wins by thin margins in a state that had voted solidly Republican in 11 of the last 12 presidential elections.

Daines wanted to flip that seat in the worst way, apparently by any means necessary. He had a hand-picked candidate (Tim Sheehy, an ex-military businessman and political novice) groomed to run. He was actively running interference against Congressman Matt Rosendale, who had lost to Tester in the previous Senate election but wanted another shot.

Daines and the Montana GOP leadership are convinced that the MTLP had drawn enough votes away from their candidates to cost them victory in two out of Tester’s last three elections. Beating an incumbent in a Montana election is always an uphill battle and they needed every advantage they could get,

To clear the path his office drafted two bills for the Montana lege. One was a transparent attempt at keeping third parties out of the Senate race. It proposed a limited-time change to election law applying only to the 2024 Senate race: a non-partisan “jungle” primary and a top-two general election, with the change sunsetting after the election.

The other bill was a permanent change to the election code raising the barriers to getting and staying on the ballot to levels impractical for any but an incumbent party to reach.

We know all this about the origins of the bill because a Democratic member of the House State Administration Committee (Ed Stafman) got word of it and requested the relevant emails, which are public records. Daines’ staff had made the mistake of CCing a state employee on the chain of messages during the drafting. Stafman read from those emails at the committee hearing we testified at, entered them into the committee minutes, and sent them to the press.

Hertz was somewhat indignant at the accusation that he wasn’t the author of the bills his name was on, but he wasn’t ashamed of their contents.

His claimed intent was to limit the ability of major parties to “weaponize” candidates from minor parties, as he admitted both incumbent parties had done. His approach was to raise the barriers to the ballot to the point there would be no third parties on it at all.

In 2018 (the year after Jon Tester was chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) the Democrats had done their part to clear the field of candidates inconvenient to them by suing the Green party off the ballot, and now it was the Republicans’ turn.

The pair of bills were introduced in the Senate March 31st and referred to the Senate State Administration Committee. This is when the MTLP first got word of them. We already had our hands full backing the Defend the Guard bill, to limit deployment of the MT National Guard to combat overseas only in wars declared by Congress. There were a number of bad pieces of legislation (including a ban on ranked choice voting and an increase in the number of signatures required to get an initiative on the ballot) that we were suddenly unable to contest; we were in a fight for our party’s life.

In the Senate committee hearings the jungle primary bill (SB 566) was too obviously corrupt for even some of the Republican members, and it was tabled. The ballot access bill (SB 565) had no supporters testify and two opponents: the League of Women Voters and MTLP Chair Sid Daoud. It nonetheless sailed through on a party line vote.

At this point we had to mobilize. The Republicans held a supermajority in both houses and the governorship. We couldn’t trust to luck or conscience on this one as the pressure from Republican leadership was intense. The MTLP Executive Committee met to authorize an unprecedented step: hiring some help. A lobbyist.

Like lawyers, everybody hates lobbyists...until they need one. And we needed one.

The MTLP leadership is all volunteers. We can’t just put our lives on hold to camp out in Helena for weeks at a time, but somebody had to. We needed to get in the faces of legislators, remind them of their duties and the impacts of these bills on the voters they represented, and find some allies. Sid ended up spending about two weeks in Helena all together, a hardship for him but no big deal to the people causing the problem. The power imbalance in this situation becomes very obvious: they can mess with us at the stroke of a pen then go have a nice lunch. We have to take a day off work, find someone to feed the dog, and drive hundreds of miles in bad weather to meet with someone who may not even show up.

So we hired Apollo Pazell. And he was amazing.

Sid, John Lamb, and myself drove up on a cold morning in April to meet him in Helena and testify before the House State Administration Committee, the next hurdle the bills had to clear.

Yes, bills, plural. Normally when a committee tables a bill it’s dead. They are too busy to revisit something they’ve rejected, but the Republican leadership twisted some arms and got all but one Republican committee member to reconsider the jungle primary bill and change their votes. It had advanced to the House and been referred to committee, where we were headed.

We met Apollo for breakfast and had come prepared with a list of potentially persuadable Representatives. He had already talked to them. He had already changed a couple of minds and knew exactly who we needed to talk to and what they might need to hear. He had flown in the day before and by dinner time had already become familiar with the key players and who thought what. Any doubts we may have had about the efficacy of spending the party’s money on a lobbyist--at least on this lobbyist--vanished.

We were already busy raising funds to cover it and donors responded. We wouldn’t go into this fight empty-handed, but it was a stretch. Even so in similar circumstances I would vote to do the same again, and I have never been more grateful to write a check.

We all signed in to testify. Sid and John spoke to the impact the bills would have on us and our voters. I appealed to consciences. Apollo gave them hard facts about the legality of what they were attempting and explained how different the results would be from the stated objectives.

I can’t know whether our testimony helped or not, but five days later the House committee tabled the jungle primary bill by a vote of 16 to one. It stayed tabled despite numerous attempts at skullduggery, including at one point amending another innocuous bill to gut it and replace every word with the contents of the tabled bill. Daines even swapped favors with Senator Rand Paul to get him to personally call to lobby the committee members. I don’t think Apollo or his phone got a break the entire time.

After testimony on the ballot access bill the committee room was cleared so the parties could plot strategy. It was clear from the questioning that the bill wasn’t going to get past the committee. When they reconvened they voted unanimously to table the bill while the sponsor worked on amending it.

We fanned out to see if we could find some legislators to talk to. We got a pretty good reception. I struck up conversations with some of the Democratic committee members; they were happy to help with the two bills we were fighting but I’m under no illusions about why. They were doing the right thing, but largely for partisan advantage.

We were pretty happy with the day’s work but Apollo warned us it was too early to pop any champagne corks and he was right. Ten days later the amended ballot access bill came back up in committee and squeaked by with a vote of 10-8. On to the house floor.

When the lege votes they do it electronically from their desks and the results come up on a big screen in the chamber. The caucuses hand out lists of bills with recommendations on yea or nay, and they flip their switches while speakers on the floor support or oppose the bills that come up. The votes are usually party line.

When SB 565 came up for vote there were speeches by proponents giving the same hollow justification they had been using before; this step was just a formality. The opposition though was surprisingly passionate. Given the partisan makeup of the House I didn’t hold out much hope, and as the votes started tallying there were more green (pass) votes than red. At first.

But they didn’t stay that way. Members were switching their votes. That never happens.

In the end the bill failed by 39 to 60. 28 Republicans had ended up opposing it. Since the Senate had already voted to end their session that was it—both bills were dead.

We had won, but it took everything we had. It had distracted us from every other legislative priority, drained all our energy and finances, and what we got for it was what we started with—what we’ve had for 40 years: ballot access.

They’ll be back for us next term. We need to be ready, and we need to make the fight worth it. We need candidates to stand up to this bullying and corruption, this addiction to power for its own sake. Maybe that candidate is you.

In the US Senate race it’s Sid. If he had any doubts about running before this fight erased them.

If your first reaction to reading this is anger at a blatant, shameless abuse of power then you have an opportunity to support candidates who oppose that kind of abuse to their very core. Candidates who stick to principle even when it’s inconvenient.

The first reaction of those who orchestrated this stunt is likely frustration that their abuse of power backfired, that they traded their honor for no gain. That won’t stop them; it may bring them back harder next time. In that coming contest we may be disadvantaged by being principled but we are determined. Don’t feel sorry for them if their next defeat is humiliating; after all, they started it. And by doing so they revealed exactly who they are.

- Marty Albini | Treasurer of the MTLP