Montana politicians are more connected to Wall Street than to the state's livestock.

Tim Sheehy is a Republican who is competing against Montana's Democratic Senator Jon Tester for a seat in the upcoming election. He, along with several other Republican candidates, were all born and raised outside of Montana. Troy Downing, who is also running for a Congressional seat in Montana, shares the same background. Even Montana's current Republican Governor, Greg Gianforte, and his opponent, Democrat Ryan Busse, are both outsiders when it comes to their birthplace.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with newcomers moving to Montana and working in business, as I myself did many years ago. However, this shift in politicians' backgrounds reflects a change in how Montanans view their identity. In the past, it was common for Montana politicians who were not government lawyers to come from farming, ranching, or other related businesses. But now, the focus seems to be on business backgrounds that may not have a close connection to Montana's land. For example, Gianforte's background is in software, Sheehy founded imaging technology and aerial firefighting businesses, and Downing is a real estate developer who has owned various properties including self-storage units and vineyards.

Traditionally, Republicans have favored candidates with business backgrounds because of their pro-business policies. However, in today's political climate, there is a growing desire for political outsiders from both parties. For example, Busse, a Democrat, is a former firearms executive with no previous elected office experience. Even recent high-profile Democratic candidates have come from diverse backgrounds such as education, management, and even music, rather than the traditional farming and ranching industries.

In the past, Montanans were wary of government officials who did not have a close connection to the land. But now, both parties seem to be elevating politicians who lack that intimate knowledge, possibly because Montanans are more concerned with ideological issues like immigration, abortion, and gender identity.

Previously, political power in Montana was often tied to grazing livestock and vast land holdings. Now, it seems to come from Wall Street stocks and luxurious mansions. For example, Sheehy and Downing both own homes in the upscale resort town of Big Sky, while Gianforte hails from the pricey Bozeman area, and Busse from the scenic and affluent Flathead region.

While these places are still considered part of Montana, they are a far cry from the more humble origins of past Montana politicians, who came from places like Butte, a rough and tumble mining town, remote logging and mining communities like Libby, and dusty oil and cattle towns like Billings. In fact, in the 2000 and 2004 gubernatorial elections, Democrat Brian Schweitzer, who owned a mint farm in the Flathead region, proudly shared that he was raised on a cattle ranch in eastern Montana.

In the past, Montana politicians often claimed their Montanan identity through shared experiences, including being born in-state and participating in land-based activities like hunting. But now, it seems to be more about whether or not they have the endorsement of organizations like the National Rifle Association.

This shift in focus makes it difficult to understand the actions of politicians. For example, in 2021, Governor Gianforte killed a mountain lion and trapped and killed a wolf. However, as someone who is not a rancher-politician, it is hard to comprehend, let alone endorse, these acts without the context of a lifelong relationship with the land and livestock. Similarly, all three Republican candidates have been cited for various hunting violations. Should we hold them to the same standards as native-born hunters? And Sheehy's company is heavily in debt, which may not be surprising for a ranch, but for an aerospace company, it raises questions.

To outsiders, choosing leaders based on ideological beliefs may not seem unusual. However, for Montana, also known as "Big Sky Country," this shift goes against the state's traditional pride in being different from the rest of the country. Montana used to be more focused on its unique sense of place, its rural nature, and its individualism. But now, as the state continues to evolve from a focus on cattle to business, and from rural to resort, Montana's politics can sometimes feel like another generic chain store, following the latest national trends.

Of course, there is still Senator Jon Tester, the lone elected Democrat who is running for re-election. He comes from a long line of farmers in the open plains of Big Sandy, representing the traditional land-based background that Montanans used to value. But the question remains, do Montana voters still want a senator like that?

Regardless of the outcome of the upcoming election, the fact that ideology now plays a larger role in choosing leaders over deep roots in the land marks a significant change for Montana. And as someone who has written extensively about Montana's history and natural beauty, I can't help but wonder if we should celebrate this change or mourn the loss of what once made Montana so special – the extraordinary landscapes and the deep connection that its people had with them.

[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]