A violation of the voters' trust

The defection of Sen. Sam Kitzenberg of Glasgow from the Republican Party to Democratic Party - giving Democrats a one-vote majority one week after the elections - stinks at several levels.

First, there is the question of betraying voter trust. Yes, indeed, many voters consider the individual qualities of candidates rather than their political alignments. But many don't. Many vote for a candidate based on their party affiliation, and the expectation that the candidate will generally support the party's positions and caucus with like-minded lawmakers. Those voters were betrayed by Kitzenberg.

If he had felt a moral imperative to switch parties, he should have done so soon enough to let voters pass judgment on what part loyalty ought to play in the moral quotient of office holders. And since he didn't, voters are entirely justified in seeing Kitzenberg's jumping ship as a crude form of "bait and switch."

Perhaps more subtle, but equally important, is how Kitzenberg's maneuver undermines the credibility of Gov. Brian Schweitzer's call for improving the appearance of propriety in government.

Schweitzer's campaign focused on state employees or elected officials who became lobbyists with undue influence on government affairs. Schweitzer felt so strongly about it that he fielded a ballot initiative that restricts state officials from becoming lobbyists for two years after they leave their state positions.

The voters overwhelmingly approved it last week, apparently overlooking the glaring omission of hiring sitting legislators to state government positions in departments that they are supposed to be overseeing from their legislative positions.

That was the case with Kitzenberg and Sen. Mike Cooney, D-Helena, who were hired to cushy state jobs by the Schweitzer administration earlier this year. Republicans made a lot of noise about it, questioning why Kitzenberg would be hired to a management analyst position paying $43,000 annually when he had a background in education. They thought the whole thing just looked bad.

But Schweitzer brushed those charges off over the summer, defending the hiring of Kiztenberg and Cooney, who took a $72,000 job with the Department of Labor. This week, Schweitzer took the position that he personally had nothing to do with Kitzenberg's hiring, and that the senator's defection wasn't entirely surprising because he had been voting with Democrats on major legislation for years.

As for Kitzenberg, he's publicly stated that the Republican Party left him, not the other way around.

The problem is, we're not talking about how an individual senator votes. We're talking about majority control of the Senate and all the power that comes with it - particularly, the ability to control committees and committee leaders who will steer the Senate agenda.

We venture to bet that Democrats would be just as upset if the situation were reversed - a Republican administration hiring a Democrat who then switched sides, giving Republicans a one-vote Senate majority a week after the election. And we would be backing their position, too.

Any appearance of propriety in this situation is out the window - in fact, the whole thing looks completely suspicious. Senate Minority Leader Bob Keenan said this week that he "wouldn't hesitate to use the word bribe" in describing the Kitzenberg switch.

So far there's no evidence of a backroom deal, where Kitzenberg was nudged or encouraged to switch sides by somebody whispering in his ear. But maybe that $43,000 salary was talking so loud that he couldn't hear the whispers. The point is, it just doesn't look right.