← Election Series · All statewide races

Our verdict

LiberalMind endorses Ann Bukacek

Election Day is November 3. Ann Bukacek, a Kalispell doctor who has sat on the Public Service Commission since 2023, seeks re-election in northwest Montana after winning her Republican primary with only a 35.5% plurality. Kevin Hamm, a business and marketing man who has run for office before, is running on families over corporate profits and the size of the power bill. No polling and no money figures for either candidate were located in the research — we say so plainly below. LiberalMind endorses Ann Bukacek. Read the research, and see why.

How Montana got here

First, a Montana fact that frames both PSC articles: Montana elects its principal statewide executive offices on a four-year cycle coinciding with the presidential election (2024, 2028). Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Auditor, and Superintendent of Public Instruction are not on the November 3, 2026 ballot. The only state executive offices on Montana's 2026 ballot are two seats on the Public Service Commission, elected by district for four-year terms.

District 5 is "a cut of northwest Montana, loosely from Flathead, Lake and Glacier Counties down to parts of Missoula and Lewis and Clark Counties," running from "the Blackfeet Indian Reservation to Helena and parts of Missoula" (MTPR). The PSC's structural facts apply here as statewide: all five current commissioners are Republican, and no Democrat has won a PSC seat since 2012 (MTPR; Generation180).

The June 2, 2026 primaries, from the primary table citing the Montana Secretary of State: Bukacek won the Republican primary with a plurality — Bukacek 10,925 (35.5%), Joe Dooling 10,149 (33.0%), David Sanders 9,677 (31.5%), total 30,751. Hamm won the Democratic primary unopposed, 22,014 (100.0%). The general-election roster — Bukacek (R, incumbent) and Hamm (D) — is corroborated by MTPR and Generation180. Sources vary Bukacek's first name — "Ann" (Ballotpedia/Generation180 usage), "Annie" (MTPR), "Anne" (some PSC coverage); the surname is consistently Bukacek, and we print Ann Bukacek.

Competitiveness, at exactly the strength sourced: MTPR assessed on October 8, 2026 that "Republicans have had the PSC locked down for a while. Kevin Hamm's message of lower power bills might resonate with voters this year, but he's a Democrat and he has to convince a lot of people who voted the Republican primary ballot to vote for him." Bukacek's 35.5% three-way primary plurality is a documented fact, printed as a fact — not converted into a rating. No public poll of District 5 was located, and no money figures for any Montana PSC candidate were located in the research — no Montana Commissioner of Political Practices filing totals were pulled for Bukacek or Hamm. We print no rating and no money comparison rather than invent either.

Ann Bukacek (Republican) — the incumbent doctor who has often voted the utility's way

Background and service: "A doctor who works in Kalispell and she's been on the PSC since 2023" (MTPR). A GoodParty compilation gives her current term as 2023 to 2027. Her pre-PSC public record, at exactly the strength sourced in this research: "During the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, she was on the local health board and pushed back against safety measures and some high profile controversies" (MTPR). That one sentence is the sourced extent of the health-board note in this research — headline-level only, with no fuller sourcing pulled — and we print it at exactly that strength and no further.

Her record in office, as reported: She "wants to be sure utilities don't go belly up and she's supported many of NorthWestern Energy's positions with her votes. In 2024 … the PSC said NorthWestern wasn't providing the agency enough information about its energy plans, including how those plans might affect customer bills. Commissioner Bukacek was the one dissenting voice. She also tried to help NorthWestern recover more money from building its new electricity plant in Laurel than the PSC majority approved. She has said she doesn't want regulation to become government overreach." In the Northstar case — a Helena small water utility — she "was outspoken in her support of residents who have had ongoing problems getting water" (MTPR). Corroborating vote detail from the Laurel / Yellowstone County Generating Station cost-recovery proceedings (November–December 2025): the commission voted 4-0, with Bukacek abstaining and the reason not stated in the report, to reject $43 million of NorthWestern's ask; Bukacek "sided with NorthWestern in her discussion of the construction costs, maintaining that construction challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic put the utility in an unusual position," called the majority's disallowance "punitive" in a second account, and proposed letting the company claim another roughly $16 million for a contractor switch.

Pros: Proven in this exact office since 2023, with a stated regulatory philosophy — solvent utilities, no government overreach — that she has applied consistently, including as the lone dissent. Her Northstar record cuts the other way from her NorthWestern votes: outspoken support for residents with ongoing water problems, against a small utility. That is a regulator distinguishing cases, not a rubber stamp reading one script.

Cons: On the biggest sourced votes in this file she stood with NorthWestern Energy against the PSC majority — the 2024 information dissent, and the Laurel cost-recovery push for roughly $16 million more than the majority approved, on a plant whose costs land in customer bills. Nearly two-thirds of her own party's primary voters chose someone else: she advanced with 35.5% in a three-way race. No campaign-finance figure for her was located.

The flaw, plainly: A documented pattern, in service, of siding with the regulated utility on cost and information questions — priced as a record voters can weigh, at the strength the reporting supports. It is not proven inability to lead, and it is not a scandal: her position is stated openly, defended in her own terms (utility solvency, pandemic construction conditions, overreach), and paired with resident-side advocacy in the Northstar case. The health-board controversy is headline-level only in this research and is not priced beyond the one sourced sentence above.

Kevin Hamm (Democratic) — the marketer running on families over corporate profits

Background and service: He has a "background in business and marketing. He founded a video production company and also organizes the Montana Pride Celebration" (MTPR). A 2023 profile adds CEO roles at Treasure State Internet & Telegraph and Auxilyum. No prior elected office is documented in the sources searched.

Prior candidacies — a conflict in the record, printed as a conflict: MTPR (2026) says, "He ran for the PSC in 2022 and ran for Congress in 2024." The compiled 2026 PSC summary says "Kevin Hamm, candidate for district 2 in 2024." Both cannot describe the same prior PSC run. His 2024 U.S. House (MT-02) Democratic primary candidacy is independently documented, and a profile of that House run quotes Hamm himself: "my last race was for the Public Service Commission [in 2022]." The weight of the sourced record supports a 2022 PSC run plus a 2024 House run; the compiled summary's "district 2 in 2024" line is carried here as an unresolved compilation conflict, not silently adopted and not silently dropped.

His platform, as reported: "Prioritizing families over corporate profits"; he criticizes the PSC "for approving NorthWestern's requests for rate increases"; "it's been too long since the PSC has cared about the people of Montana" and "people's power bills are on the ballot this year" (MTPR). His own campaign site argues District 5 is winnable on a "Democratic Party Quotient" of 45.9% — a campaign claim, recorded as such.

The Manchin-test fact, stated plainly: No in-service break by Hamm with his party on Constitution, free-market, or freedom values was located in this research — he has no elected service in which such a break could be documented, and no vote, filing, or documented act is sourced.

Pros: A business and marketing background, prior candidacies that show persistence, and a message — the power bill — aimed at the exact cost District 5 households feel. His central attack on the incumbent (the PSC approving NorthWestern's rate requests) is aimed at a record that, per the reporting above, really does contain utility-side votes to argue about.

Cons: No prior elected office is documented, and no regulatory record exists in this file to inspect. His party has not won a PSC seat since 2012, in a district where, per MTPR, he must convert Republican primary voters to win. The conflict over his own prior-run history is unreconciled in the sources. No campaign-finance figure for him was located.

The flaw, plainly: No proven flaw in service was located — and no proven exception case either. Under our doctrine an enabler is not an extremist, and Hamm is not priced as one; he is a Democrat with no sourced in-service break from his party on our values, which is the standing reason the exception is not earned. His critique of Bukacek's utility-side votes is the rhetoric species aimed at a documented record — legitimate argument, not a finding of corruption, and we print it as argument.

The minor candidates, briefly

There are none in any compilation checked for District 5. A standing check found no pedophile-association material meeting the proven standard for either candidate — absence noted, nothing implied.

OUR CALL

LiberalMind endorses Ann Bukacek.

Bukacek is proven in this exact office, states her regulatory philosophy openly, and applies it consistently — including resident-side advocacy in the Northstar water case that complicates any simple capture story. Her NorthWestern-side votes on Laurel cost recovery and the 2024 information dissent are printed in full above as the record voters should weigh; they are a philosophy in action, not proven inability to lead. Hamm brings no elected record, no documented Manchin-test break, and an unreconciled conflict over his own prior-run history. Endorse the proven in-service conservative, with her utility-side record on the page where voters can price it themselves.

For the complete Election 2026 breakdown — every race, claim by claim — see the full coverage on our website.

Vote early. Research your candidates. Choose the best moderates, whatever their party — no extremism from either side. And encourage your friends and family to do the same.

Sources

Election result — November 4, 2026

Result pending. No verified call (Associated Press or official) as of November 4, 2026. This page will be updated when the race is called or certified. The original article above is unchanged.

AI-assisted article — but the sources are human, and the facts are very real.

← Back to the Election Series