Enron-style accounting is a serious charge. It seems likely the Governor will simply spin as he usually does: "Republicans are supposed to be FOR giving money back to the people. Now they're against it?"

That's the kind of thing that ought not to be allowed to stand. The crooks at Enron cooked their books to convince the shareholders that they were benefitting. In the end, it cost them dearly. If Schweitzer is allowed to perpetrate the same accounting fraud against Montanans, we will pay as dear a cost.

ABSOLUTELY UNACCEPTABLE!

There is one thing that goes beyond the boundaries of politics and that is honest stewardship of the taxpayers money.

For those of you who are reading this post and thinking, "Hey, don't get your knickers in a knot - there's still a surplus", I want you to think back a few years. This is exactly the same path that Bernie Ebbers (WorldCom), Joe Nacchio (Qwest), the Whosis from Tyco, as well as the Enron gang went down. Remember those glowing revenue reports and the lovely dividends? Remember the discussions about "generally accepted accounting practices"? Remember the $6,000 shower curtain? Remember the thousands of people who lost huge portions - if not all - of their retirement savings? Remember Montana Power? The big guys did okay - those of us a touch lower on the food chain got screwed (pardon my outrage)!

"Fudging the numbers" to make some people look good and everybody else feel good should land anybody involved on the unemployment line at a minimum, in jail if necessary.

In my opinion, the Governor gets until Tuesday at 5 p.m. to thoroughly explain EXACTLY what happened, how it happened, who did it, under what authority, and what steps are being taken to punish the perpetrators.

Set up the guillotine, bring out the tumbrel carts.

OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!!!!!!!

Excellent reporting Carter. It will be interesting to watch how this plays out.

That very same Principal Fiscal Analyst Terry Johnson said in the September edition of the Interim, a newsletter for legislators that "...the certified revenue amount was about $1.838 billion which is approximately $36 million more than the trigger amount. This means that taxpayers will receive $36 million in tax credits that may be claimed on their tax year 2007 returns."

So which is it? Or is this just another one of your political hack jobs for the taxpayers association?

I'm glad Lily found that quote from Terry Johnson, because I remembered seeing it, too. I had hopes this blog could stick to discussion instead of rhetoric, but apparently not. That's alright, I guess, but Mr. Carter's commentary is sounding more and more like past editions of the Republican Party electronic newsletter (aka GOP e-brief). We all know how quickly that publication lost credibility.

Lily - I believe that issue of The Interim came out before Terry Johnson found the mistake represented in his memo. I think if you'd go ask Mr. Johnson today, he's confirm that the certified revenue amount was over-estimated by the administration as a result of their carelessness. I have no problem with giving tax revenue back to taxpayers, but the administration needs to follow the law, which stipulates that generally accepted accounting principles must be used.

Viola - The irony of your statement, "I had hopes this blog could stick to discussion instead of rhetoric" is kind of funny. If you want to bring something to the discussion, please do so; don't just attack me for being a Republican.

It was legislation sponsored by Rep. Sonju. Was it not his intent to give money back to taxpayers?

It is the responsibility of the executive branch to implement the law.

I guess it seems to me you are trying to have your cake and eat it too. You can't on one hand want the money back and then on the other flat out abolish the process.

If you like the outcome and agree it was legislative intent, then what's your idea - how do you give the money back?

Lily - did you actually read any of the material before you posted? It is the responsibility of the administration to implement the law - and in this case they broke the law by cooking the books.

We should be giving taxpayers a break. Here's an idea, let's scrap all the complicated formulas and just cut tax rates. That's how I'd propose giving the money back.

Mr. Carter, I'm not attacking you for being a Republican. Some of my best friends are... Anyway, why continue persuing this line of attack when Mr. Terry Johnson himself acknowledged the numbers were certified?

I don't know who Viola and Lily are, but they obviously are part of the crowd that chooses to ignore those pesky little details called facts. If either of them had bothered to download the referenced paper from Terry Johnson, and then read it (What a concept - knowing what the bleepers you're talking about!) - they possibly would have understood that the "certification" was done by the Department of Administration - not by the Legislative Fiscal Analyst.

Yo, Ladies! That's the problem - the DOA certified revenue that ain't there!!!!!!!

Maybe this comparison might help put this issue in perspective - If Montana were a publicly traded company, the provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley would apply. Title III mandates that senior executives take individual responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of financial reports. It specifies the responsibility of [corporate] officers for the accuracy and validity of financial reports. For example, Section 302 implies that the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer should certify and approve the integrity of their [company] financial reports.

Under Sarbanes-Oxley, Ewers (CFO) and Schweitzer (CEO) would be heading for a stint in the Big House.

seems simple to me- the mistake was made my rep sonju and the republican leadership. it was their bill and they made the mistake. the gov was just following legislative intent AND taxpayer wishes. i trust, carter, that you will not take your $140 bucks, right. After all, its' 'dirty' money. gimme a break!

Stan the man:

You're absolutely wrong. The problem wasn't with the bill, the problem was with the way that the administration calculated tax revenue - they didn't use generally accepted accounting principles. The law (and common sense) stipulates that they must follow these principles.

They're not following legislative intent, however they are following taxpayer wishes to a degree. If they had followed the taxpayer wishes 100% the governor would have agreed to give real tax relief in the form of a permanent tax cut instead of monkeying around with these complicated formulas.

Where exactly did I say that it's a bad thing to give taxpayers their money back? Right, that never happened.

Stan, if you're going to post on this blog, please read everything first before firing half cocked.

well, my friend carter, i will admit that it appears i may be at a bit of a disadvantage here. while it's pretty clear you have access to the republican talking points on this matter, all i have to go by is common sense (you should try it sometime, usually works pretty good) and the good ol' media reports.

that said, it's clear that all this nonsense is a baseless political hack-job. this is about giving taxpayers their money back... not big corporations like you repubs like to do... i'm sorry this $140 wont translate into a big "thank-you" donation to the GOP. too bad!

Stan - back it up. Under the Martz and Racicot administrations, where did the tax relief go? Show me numbers that corporations got more tax dollars back than individual Montana taxpayers. Sorry, but you can't because it's not true. And what's wrong with giving corporations a tax break anyway? We can't all work for non-profits and the government. Giving tax relief to business leads to job and wage growth.

And don't accuse me of following the Republican talking points and then falling back into the typical Democrat mantra.

I was just over at Left in the West where Lily and Viola have carried their inane analysis of this issue so they can distort reality to fit their agendas without anyone figuring out that they don't have a clue. I was going to leave a comment there, but the futility overwhelmed me. Some days the fight just isn't worth the fight.

Heavy sigh.

EARTH TO REPUBLICANS: YOU NEED TO SAY SOMETHING!
I don't understand why the Republicans are not going crazy over this issue. Yes, they are in favor of tax cuts. No, they are not in favor of cutting taxes illegally. It is not too much of a contradiction to say they are in favor of less government and a government that obeys the laws.
I have talked to several Republicans in leadership and asked them to push this issue. And they cite concerns about being labeled anti-tax cut. Give me a break, the people of Montana are not that simple-minded. How about anti-corruption, anti-embezzlement, anti-dictatorship? This is not a difficult concept.
As for blame, it doesn't matter whether the problem started with a drafting error in legislative services, a mistake by the legislators, or a problem in the department of revenue or budget office. The point is that the mistake was discovered in time for the Governor to ask the legislature to fix it at special session a deux, and he declined to do so. Instead, he decided to act like his typical mafia boss embezzler self and cook the books so Ma and Pa Kettle could thank him for sending them another check in the mail that would help them buy little Timmy shoes and school books for the winter.
Wake up, Republicans! Or you will be another doormat that the King Fish will use to wipe off his dog's muddy paws.

Way to go, CrazyJoe!!!!! I have been flabbergasted at the lack of outrage on this issue. I, too, have have the same responses from the republican legislators I've talked to. This isn't about tax cuts - this is about the Schweitzer administration's "end justifies the means" and the complicity of the republicans. You nailed it! Hope you keep coming back here - we need your insights.

this says it all:

http://www.leftinthewest.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1049

Stan - nice cartoon. But I have to remind you that Republicans had a property tax relief (not a one-time rebate) plan that would have returned more dollars to more Montanans. I can't argue that a lot of Republicans opposed the property tax rebate plan, but it was only because they were supporting a better plan. So no, your picture doesn't really say it all.