State Legislature 2020: Melody Benes

I have always been politically active and have a deep-rooted passion for Montanans and individual liberties. As time has worn on, it seems every year the expansion of government has surpassed the year before. I believe that given my diverse life experiences I can make a meaningful and positive impact in the legislature.

I have two main concerns, how the funding is allocated and heavy regulations on businesses, primarily small businesses. I hope to be able to draw back some of these regulations so businesses can have more freedom to operate and thrive. Budget allocation always seems to be an issue and I hope to be a voice of reason when budgets are made. There are many restrictions on how funding can be used. There is also concern for funding going to non-essential unnecessary projects.

I am a firm believer that every decision that is made will have some sort of impact on future generations even if the impact is small. Balancing immediate needs while considering their impact, in the long run, can be difficult, however, as of late it seems governments look more to the immediate benefit without considering the lasting impact these decisions have. I feel very strongly that as lawmakers it is important to have more focus on the future when making decisions. If a policy will have a negative impact on our future and our posterity than it is not an effective policy. This may require having to go back to the drawing board to address a problem until it is solved, but the security of our posterity is more vital.

I definitely view myself as more of a delegate of my constituents rather than a trustee. I hope that I can foster an open channel of communication between myself and my constituents. In order to make lasting and effective policies, it is essential that constituents feel represented and heard. When a constituent feels misrepresented or unheard that fosters a sense of trust, when that trust is broken our morale as a country breaks.

Many great policies die in a stalemate because of various biases. This does nothing to benefit constituents and breaks their trust. Bi-partisan solutions and compromise are essential to making effective policies. When there is conflict it can always be worked out as long as both parties involved are able to set aside their biases to hear the concerns of the other. Sometimes a non-biases mediator is needed to help them navigate through their concerns. For example, I helped mediate a conflict between roommates, and with my direction, they were able to work out the things that were bothering them about the other and come to a more amicable living arrangement. Mediation is sometimes necessary in policymaking as well. When an issue is very divisive it is hard to understand a different perspective than your own. In these cases, it is necessary for a neutral party to help both parties come to a compromise.

There are always tradeoffs that can be made when making tax decisions. Either cutting some taxes and raising others or if it is an excessive tax eliminating it altogether. Tax systems should always be closely examined and updated as needed. Removing the business equipment tax would ultimately be beneficial to business growth. I am not opposed to local option authority as I feel that cities and counties are more closely connected to their communities and are better at evaluating their community’s needs rather than the state. I am not opposed to any adjustments or changes to property assessments, whichever is most beneficial to our communities and individuals.

Yes, I would support liability protections, given the nature of the response to Covid-19, the future of many businesses has been compromised. It is unfair to leave them vulnerable to unfair suits for Covid-19 exposure. Businesses can make policies and set standards, but they cannot control the lives of every employee. Exposure is practically inevitable. If the business is not at fault they should not be held liable.

I do support full funding of Medicaid. I would prefer that there be no further expansions at this time, but realize that there is a likelihood that it will be expanded so I would want to ensure the expansion is reasonable and would not place a heavy burden on taxpayers.

I do think that mental health and addiction treatment is essential to relieving the burden from our prison system and that prisons are not an effective treatment for mental illnesses or addictions. I would like to see a more unified response statewide to these issues. I do believe local governments should be involved, but not be the sole bearer of costs and that there should be more funding at the state level for these particular issues. This is the best way to ensure a unified response.

I think it is a great bill and having the private sector more involved in public assets relieves a heavy burden from the state. If it is working successfully thus far I do not see any need to change it.