Hill complaint isn't a witch hunt
Guest commentary:
I write in response to the Daily Inter Lake editorial of May 28 (“Is Motl on a political witch hunt?”).
That editorial cautioned the commissioner of political practices against “resurrecting” any complaint against Rick Hill for accepting a $500,000 over the limit campaign contribution during his 2012 candidacy for governor of the state of Montana.
It is not that simple. There is nothing dead or dying about the complaint against Rick Hill that requires resurrection of any sort. The complaint against Rick Hill (O’Brien v. HilI COPP-2012-CFP-009) is alive and well before the commissioner of political practices, held in abeyance (awaiting the 9th Circuit decision) along with three other comparable complaints. This abeyance status is listed and explained on the complaint docket maintained on the commissioner’s website.
Given the 9th Circuit’s decision reversing and remanding the underlying federal court decision, I will now take all four complaints (including Rick Hill’s) out of abeyance, post the complaints to the active complaint docket and decide the issues presented by the complaint. The commissioner is in my judgment required to so act by law and fairness. The law involved is that defining Montana’s contribution limits. Except for the six-day period in 2012 where an injunction was in place, Montana’s contribution limits have governed each 2012 and 2014 election to public office in Montana.
Most candidates for 2012 public office in Montana did not take over-the-limit contributions during the six-day injunctive period. The fairness involved is therefore owed every 2012 candidate for Montana public office. This includes a candidate like Tim Fox who, while accepting over the limit contributions during the six-day injunction period, promptly returned the over-the-limit contributions once the injunction was lifted back in 2012. The complaint against Mr. Fox was dismissed and the reasoning for doing so is set out in decision on that complaint. That decision is available to any Flathead Valley reader on the campaign decision docket atwww.politicaIpractices.mt.gov under Moog v. Fox COPP-2012-CFP-0032.
The complaints against Mr. Hill and the other 2012 candidates were not dismissed and remained for future decision because over-the-limit funds were accepted by the candidates during the six-day injunction period and not returned in 2012 when the injunction was lifted and contribution limits restored. As I trust people can see, there are legal, practical and fairness issues raised by the Hill complaint that need to be addressed and resolved by the COPP in a public manner through a published decision. That decision approach is part of the transparent consideration of election campaign issues that Montanans expect and want from the commissioner of political practices.
Thank you for your consideration of our explanation.
— Jonathan Motl is the Montana Commissioner of Political Practices