News Cut Category Archive: Politics

How others see us: The caucus vote

Posted at 2:02 PM on February 7, 2012 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Guardian website/newspaper in the UK apparently sent a team to Minnesota to find out how Minnesotans made up their minds about who to vote for in the primary (psst, Guardian, it's a caucus).

And by "Minnesotans," they mean about five white people on either a city block in Minneapolis or a shopping mall in Maple Grove.

Watch the video here.

(h/t: Jon Gordon)

Comment on this post

Komen VP resignation unlikely to ease political debate

Posted at 9:52 AM on February 7, 2012 by Bob Collins (4 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

It should be some session with reporters in Georgia today when Karen Handel, who has resigned as VP of the Susan G. Komen for the Cure, speaks about her departure and, presumably, the dust-up caused by last week's defunding -- and subsequent refunding -- of Planned Parenthood. Handel's fingerprints appear to be on the original decision.

She refused a severance package, which usually comes in exchange for keeping silent about the inner workings of an organization. Bottom line: There'll be some quotable statements in Goergia today.

In her resignation e-mail, Handel acknowledges she played a big part in the decision. In an earlier interview, Komen founder Nancy Brinker said she didn't. Somebody's lying.

Here's her resignation email:

Dear Ambassador Brinker:

Susan G. Komen for the Cure has been the recognized leader for more 30 years in the fight against breast cancer here in the US - and increasingly around the world.

As you know, I have always kept Komen's mission and the women we serve as my highest priority - as they have been for the entire organization, the Komen Affiliates, our many supporters and donors, and the entire community of breast cancer survivors. I have carried out my responsibilities faithfully and in line with the Board's objectives and the direction provided by you and Liz.

We can all agree that this is a challenging and deeply unsettling situation for all involved in the fight against breast cancer. However, Komen's decision to change its granting strategy and exit the controversy surrounding Planned Parenthood and its grants was fully vetted by every appropriate level within the organization. At the November Board meeting, the Board received a detailed review of the new model and related criteria. As you will recall, the Board specifically discussed various issues, including the need to protect our mission by ensuring we were not distracted or negatively affected by any other organization's real or perceived challenges. No objections were made to moving forward.

I am deeply disappointed by the gross mischaracterizations of the strategy, its rationale, and my involvement in it. I openly acknowledge my role in the matter and continue to believe our decision was the best one for Komen's future and the women we serve. However, the decision to update our granting model was made before I joined Komen, and the controversy related to Planned Parenthood has long been a concern to the organization. Neither the decision nor the changes themselves were based on anyone's political beliefs or ideology. Rather, both were based on Komen's mission and how to better serve women, as well as a realization of the need to distance Komen from controversy. I believe that Komen, like any other nonprofit organization, has the right and the responsibility to set criteria and highest standards for how and to whom it grants.

What was a thoughtful and thoroughly reviewed decision - one that would have indeed enabled Komen to deliver even greater community impact - has unfortunately been turned into something about politics. This is entirely untrue. This development should sadden us all greatly.

Just as Komen's best interests and the fight against breast cancer have always been foremost in every aspect of my work, so too are these my priorities in coming to the decision to resign effective immediately. While I appreciate your raising a possible severance package, I respectfully decline. It is my most sincere hope that Komen is allowed to now refocus its attention and energies on its mission.

With Handel aboard, there was no way the Komen wasn't going to be seen as bowing to politics in its Planned Parenthood decision, considering that she'd run for governor of Georgia before and made her position pretty clear:

First, let me be clear, since I am pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood. During my time as Chairman of Fulton County, there were federal and state pass-through grants that were awarded to Planned Parenthood for breast and cervical cancer screening, as well as a "Healthy Babies Initiative." The grant was authorized, regulated, administered and distributed through the State of Georgia. Because of the criteria, regulations and parameters of the grant, Planned Parenthood was the only eligible vendor approved to meet the state criteria. Additionally, none of the services in any way involved abortions or abortion-related services. In fact, state and federal law prohibits the use of taxpayer funds for abortions or abortion related services and I strongly support those laws. Since grants like these are from the state I'll eliminate them as your next Governor.

Even if it's true -- unlikely though it seems -- that the entire Komen episode wasn't a political coup unraveling, it appears unlikely the organization can escape the political sphere it's spent the last few days desperately trying to avoid.

Comment on this post

Battle over depiction of Chinese in political ad

Posted at 12:29 PM on February 6, 2012 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Is this ad offensive?

In a conference call with reporters today, Michigan Senate candidate Pete Hoekstra said the ad is only "insensitive to Debbie Stabenow and her spending."

The Michigan chapter of the group Asian & Pacific Islander American Vote called the spot "very disturbing" and said the campaign "chose to use harmful negative stereotypes that intrinsically encourage anti-Asian sentiment."

Comment on this post

Of some of the people, for some of the people

Posted at 11:58 AM on February 1, 2012 by Bob Collins (9 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

This is the quote making the news today, "I'm not concerned about the very poor because they have a safety net," GOP soon-to-be-nominee Mitt Romney said to CNN this morning.

No doubt this will become an ad sometime between now and November, but there was another sentence in his interview that strikes me as equally fascinating.

"You can choose where to focus. You can choose to focus on the rich; that's not my focus. You can focus on the very poor; that's not my focus. My focus is on middle-income Americans," Romney said.

Which brings the obvious question: Can a person running for office, focus on -- that is, appeal to -- more than one group?

Comment on this post

Colbert's PAC rakes in $1 million

Posted at 12:15 PM on January 31, 2012 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Comedian Stephen Colbert's intended abuse of the campaign finance system to show its absurd flaws is, perhaps, one of the most brilliant pieces of journalism on the subject, partly because it could only be properly exposed via comedy.

Colbert, creator of the Super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow Tomorrow, has been exposing "super PACS," which are allowed to raise unlimited amounts from unions, corporations, and individuals, and then pour the money into campaigns.

Colbert's report filing is the sort of thing that can make the usually useless Federal Elections Commission disclosure database for the PAC required reading.

Take today's supplemental disclosure report memo, for example:

January 31, 2012

Federal Election Commission
999 E Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20463

Re: Supplemental Memo To Disclosure Report

Dear Sirs and Sirettes,

Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow (ABTT) would like it entered into the record that as of January 30th, 2012, the sum total of our donations was $1,023,121.24.

Stephen Colbert, President of ABTT, has asked that I quote him as saying, ''Yeah! How you like me now, F.E.C? I'm rolling seven digits deep! I got 99 problems but a non-connected independent-expenditure only committee ain't one!''

I would like it noted for the record that I advised Mr. Colbert against including that quote.

Sincerely,

Shauna Polk
Treasurer
Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, Inc.

But Colbert's PAC hasn't produced an "ad" for the Florida primary, his last one coming just before South Carolina:

That ad cost $24,500, according to FEC documents, bringing the total PAC contributions to about $90,000.

Comment on this post

Should kids be allowed to drink with parents?

Posted at 2:51 PM on January 30, 2012 by Bob Collins (11 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Judging by the immediate -- and limited -- reaction on Twitter, a bill to allow 16 year olds to drink in the company of parents is a winner, although it probably has little chance of passage.

State Representatives Phyllis Kahn and Joe Mullery filed the bill at the Minnesota House of Representatives today. It allows people as young as 16 to drink in bars and restaurants when accompanied by a parent or legal guardian.

The bill also lowers the drinking age (in bars and restaurants) from 21 to 18.

Why limit it to bars and restaurants? This story out of Pennsylvania offers the answer. A woman bought a half-keg of beer for her son's graduation party. Three kids were killed about a mile away. She just pleaded guilty and will be sentenced in three months. (h/t: Dennis Jansen)

Wisconsin allows kids to drink in bars and restaurants when accompanied by parents (just don't try to play a guitar). There is no minimum age requirement for kids in those situations.

But some lawmakers in Wisconsin want to set the minimum age to 18. A bill passed the Wisconsin Assembly in 2010. It was opposed by a "youth rights group," which said it's a family matter. The bill never made it into law.

Comment on this post

Abortion and lower voting ages

Posted at 2:47 PM on January 26, 2012 by Bob Collins (12 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

You can set your legislative watch by the filing of some bills and proposed constitutional amendments whenever the Legislature returns to session. Two of them made their appearance today in the legislative "inbox."

ABORTION BAN
HF1928 would add another constitutional amendment to the ballot banning the use of state funds for abortion:

State funds shall not be used to fund abortions, except to the extent necessary for continued participation in a federal program. For purposes of this section, "abortion" means the use of any means to terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be
pregnant with knowledge that the termination with those means will, with reasonable
likelihood, cause the death of the fetus. "Fetus" means any individual human organism
from fertilization until birth.

Under federal law, abortions need to be publically funded when there arelife-threatening complications for the mother or fetus and cases of rape or incest.

In 1995, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that public funds are required to be used when necessary for abortions, because failing to do so violates a woman's privacy

It is critical to note that the right of privacy under our constitution protects not simply the right to an abortion, but rather it protects the woman's decision to abort; any legislation infringing on the decision-making process, then, violates this fundamental right. In the present case, the infringement is the state's offer of money to women for health care services necessary to carry the pregnancy to term, and the state's ban on health care funding for women who choose therapeutic abortions. Faced with these two options, financially independent women might not feel particularly compelled to choose either childbirth or abortion based on the monetary incentive alone. Indigent women, on the other hand, are precisely the ones who would be most affected by an offer of monetary assistance, and it is these women who are targeted by the statutory funding ban. We simply cannot say that an indigent woman's decision whether to terminate her pregnancy is not significantly impacted by the state's offer of comprehensive medical services if the woman carries the pregnancy to term. We conclude, therefore, that these statutes constitute an infringement on the fundamental right of privacy.

Here is the entire 1995 court ruling.

LOWERING THE VOTING AGE

Rep. Phyllis Kahn has dusted off an old proposal that changes the state and local election voting age from 18 to 16. HF1951 proposes a constitutional amendment that would allow anyone in the U.S. for at least three months to vote at the lowered age:

The question submitted must be: Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to allow persons 16 or more years of age to vote in state and local elections?

In the past, Kahn has noted that the state allows 14-year-olds to operate firearms and 16-year-olds to drive. She previously has said the voting age should be as low as 12.

Comment on this post

The finger wag: What's the problem here?

Posted at 2:29 PM on January 26, 2012 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Is America -- or its media -- making too big a deal over this?

In an age where TV cameras follow a president everywhere, just this one photo seems to exist to fuel the discussion in some corners today about whether it's unseemly to argue with a president. Odd, though, how the video cuts away before the good stuff.

"I grew up hearing that you treat the office with respect, and people aren't buying that anymore," says Cassandra Dahnke, co-founder of the Institute for Civility in Politics in Houston.

But are we asking more of politicians than we do ourselves? Who hasn't let someone else know when they're unhappy with something they said or wrote, as apparently is the case here?

And who started the conversation above, which apparently was about something the Arizona governor wrote about a meeting with the president?

"We started to have a conversation about the economy and jobs and he kind of diverted the conversation to my book," Gov. Jan Brewer, R-AZ, told Fox.

But even by Minnesota standards, the protocol of politics is pretty passive aggressive. On the Senate floor, for example, referring to another senator as "my friend," is a sign of respect and genuine warmth. "My good friend" means "I don't like him/her that much" and "my very good friend" means "I can't stand him/her."

The presidency deserves respect, of course. But it was never intended to be an office of royalty.

Comment on this post

Debating distractions

Posted at 10:32 AM on January 25, 2012 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Of all the debates held in Minnesota over the years, few rival the traditional "last debate" at the Fitzgerald Theater for substance. Moderator Gary Eichten had a simple rule: The focus is on the ideas and content of the candidates up for election, not the ability of the audience to cheer louder than their opponents.

This week, a moderator of a national debate -- Brian Williams -- set ground rules that the audience's job primarily was to be quiet and let the candidates live and die on their own substance.

Some politicians hated that idea.

Comment on this post

Today's House bills of note

Posted at 1:23 PM on January 24, 2012 by Bob Collins (7 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Now that the Minnesota Legislature is back in session, we're getting a fairly steady diet of proposed laws, most of which will never see the light of day. Here's a look at some of the more interesting bills lawmakers tossed in the hopper today.

TEACHER BASIC SKILLS
HF1770 requires teacher candidates to pass a basic skills exam in reading, writing, and math.

SLOTS
HF1779 authorizes the State Lottery to put slot machines at Canterbury Park and other racetracks with the money going to construction of stadiums for the Minnesota Vikings and Saint Paul Saints.

MY OTHER CAR IS A KIDNEY
HF1792 creates a special Anatomical Gift license plate. Money raised goes to a grant program to encourage organ donation.

LICENSE TO STEEL
HF1793 requires the use of American-made steel in any public works project.

SHHH! WE'RE SHOOTING HERE
HF1816 authorizes firearms dealers to possess and sell silencers to law enforcement and wildlife management agencies. Is this an issue? The bill cites "tactical emergency response operations include execution of high risk search and arrest warrants, incidents of terrorism, hostage rescue, and any other tactical deployments involving high risk circumstances."

THE EDUCATION BEFORE THE EDUCATION
It costs about $115 got get married in Minnesota. Under HF1818, a member of the armed forces would get $75 after completing "premarital education" within three months.

THE "S" WORD
Is it a bad sign that legislators are considering shutdown legislation? HF1834 would require that any state program generating revenue, has to keep operating in the event of a shutdown.

LAWMAKERS, DON'T DRIVE TO THE LEGISLATURE DRUNK
We'll bet you didn't know that under the Minnesota Constitution, members of the Legislature cannot be arrested during the session "and in going to or returning from the same" except for treason, felony and breach of the peace, HF1838 puts "driving while impaired" under "breach of the peace."

BIKE NIGHT LIGHTS
HF1873 would provide money to give bicycling lighting to bicyclists.

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AMENDMENT REPEAL
HF1885 repeals the proposed constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman, which will appear on the November ballot. This one is notable for who is not on the sponsor list.

HEALTH CARE FREEDOM
HF1898, which is one of several anti-health-care-law proposals, amends the Minnesota Constitution that prohibits anyone from being compelled to participate in a health care plan.

NO PLAY. NO PAY
HF1906 prevents legislators from getting paid during a government shutdown.

TESTING FOR WELFARE
This one has gone nowhere in past sessions and it's back again. HF1919 requires drug testing for welfare recipients.

Comment on this post

Mitt Romney's tax bracket

Posted at 1:15 PM on January 17, 2012 by Bob Collins (7 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Few of us probably know offhand what tax bracket we're in, but if Mitt Romney is anywhere near correct about his, it's a safe bet that most people aren't in his.

Most people are in a higher one.

Romney told a news conference today that he's "probably" in the 15-percent bracket.

What is it in dollars and cents?

The 15% tax bracket for an individual is a ataxable income between $8,500 and $34,500. For a married couple filing jointly, it's between $17,000 and $69,000 of taxable income.

"Taxable income" is really regularly taxed Income minus adjustments, deductions, and exemptions.

How does a rich guy like Romney pull off paying taxes like a working stiff?

"Because my last 10 years, my income comes overwhelmingly from some investments made in the past, whether ordinary income or earned annually. I got a little bit of income from my book, but I gave that all away. And then I get speakers' fees from time to time, but not very much.' "

Not very much would be about $362,000 in speaking fees. His net worth is about $200 million.
If just half of that is liquid (not likely) and he gets the miniscule 1% return each year, based on current rates, that's $1 million a year. That is to say: It takes a lot of work to be that wealthy and be in that tax bracket.

The 15-percent tax bracket, by the way, is one of the few tax brackets that were not affected by tax increases in the last several decades. It was unaffected by the tax increase of 1993, which targeted the wealthy.

Comment on this post

Wanted: A fence around a prison

Posted at 12:20 PM on January 17, 2012 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The big projects get all the ink and attention when a governor releases a bonding bill , but there are smaller projects which pique interest, too.

Gov. Dayton issued his bonding recommendations today, included therein was a fence for the Shakopee women's prison. It was built in the 1980s without a fence. The governor is seeking over $5 million for a fence. He says the population has increased six-fold. Not having a fence has also made Minnesota the butt of a few jokes. (may not be suitable for the workplace)

More seriously, Shakopee Patch describes a good reason for a fence: To keep people out:

"We have more males than females intruding," said Calvin Miller, associate warden of administration. "We had some recently pull up in a car calling an inmate's name. We don't know if that was for an escape."

One man recently walked onto the prison grounds waving a cane designed for the blind. When staff approached, he dropped the cane and took off running. One inmate thought she saw her ex-boyfriend's car driving and feared he was coming to kill her. Staff have found drugs and alcohol stashed on the grounds, presumably left for offenders, and they say their big fear is their ability to stash weapons.

"Many of these women have been in volatile relationships with people who are on the spooky side and may not be overly stable," Beltz said. "I can't harp on this enough --not having a fence is a safety issue for our staff, offenders and the public."

By the way, whatever happened to Bo Dietl, the over-the-top "security expert" featured in the comedy bit? Three years after this 2006 Daily Show episode, the New York Post reported he was one of the corrupt cops in New York who tipped off members of the Gambino crime family.

When WikiLeaks distributed classified information in 2010, Dietl called for the assassination of its founder, Julian Assange.

Comment on this post

Death of a fact-checker

Posted at 2:38 PM on January 13, 2012 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Media, Politics

Richard Threlkeld was killed in a car crash in New York this morning. A few people -- news junkies, mostly -- will recognize him as a former network news correspondent for CBS and ABC News. He cut his journalistic teeth as a TV reporter in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

More than likely, though, few people will remember that it was Threlkeld who made fact-checking political candidates a standard of network news. He started doing so with the famous Dukakis "tank" ad in the 1988 presidential election.

Very little of the ad was actually true, Threlkeld pointed out in a piece that took the assertions apart one by one. But it didn't matter, because it was enough that Dukakis simply looked silly,.

Threlkeld and journalism expert Kathleen Hall Jamieson discussed the technique during a seminar at Jamieson's Annenberg School for Communications in 1992. You can find a copy of the presentation here and it's worth watching again.

During it, he lamented his company's definition of balance: that if he found falsehoods in a campaign ad for then (vice) president George Bush, he had to find falsehoods in challenger Mike Dukakis. "The problem ... you always want to find two sides of a story. In this case there was only one side of the story, and I was unsuccessful in convincing them that sometimes there's only one side of a story."

Coincidentally, Threlkeld's death came on the same day that the New York Times, which sees itself as the defining standard of journalism, caused a ruckus in the journalism community by asking whether it's OK in 2012 to point out the falsehoods of political candidates.

Also coincidentally, his death came the week that his former company, CBS, launched a new morning TV news show that it claimed -- mostly, incorrectly -- would put the "news back in morning news shows." He and Leslie Stahl were the anchors of the CBS morning news show from 1977 to 1979. It tanked in the ratings.

Comment on this post

When political analysts make it up

Posted at 2:23 PM on January 11, 2012 by Bob Collins (23 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

One of the great problems of having political analysts on the payroll is that they often have to say something even when there's nothing to say. That's when they make it up and hope you won't notice.

We noticed.

Political analysts can be fairly bad at math, especially when they're trying to jam their reality into an equation that doesn't add up. Last night's New Hampshire results provide the examples.

William Kristol got the ball rolling last night by declaring Romney's vote total to be "worrisome," noting that turnout was down.

The problem here appears to be math. Kristol said Romney's vote total was about the same as, or a little less than, what he got four years ago. And that's true, if by "the same as or a little less than" you actually mean 26 percent more. Romney garnered 97,532 votes last night, compared to 75,546 four years ago. It was also 10 percent more than the amount that John McCain received in New Hampshire four years ago.

Kristol was working for FoxNews, but today, NPR didn't fare much better in solving the math problem.

In their weekly Political Junkie chat, political editor Ken Rudin and NPR Talk of the Nation host Neal Conan wanted to make a similar point to Kristol's (the Republicans are in trouble) and if he had to slaughter the rules of statistics, that's just what he had to do.

"If you take out all the new voters that Ron Paul brought to the caucuses in Iowa, and take out the new voters that Ron Paul brought to the primary in New Hampshire, turnout was actually lower than 2008 in both places," Conan said, before Rudin agreed with him without question. Wrong.

Let's think about Conan's qualifier for a second. Why would you remove a piece of reality under the assumption that it would reveal an underlying reality? And why would you remove "new" voters from the comparison and not remove all the "new" voters from the 2008 primary to -- inelegantly and inaccurately -- achieve a more fair comparison?

"If you take out the killings, Washington actually has a very very low crime rate," then Mayor Marion Barry once said of his famously crime-ridden city.

Similarly, one could say, if you took out 19 losses from last year's Minnesota Twins season, they actually turned in a winning season. The problem, of course, is you can't remove a piece of reality in order to create a clearer reality. The Twins were pretty bad and as noted political analyst Bill Parcells once said, "you are what your record says you are."

The last time there was a Republican primary in New Hampshire without a Democratic contest of any note was 1996. In that election, 282,697 Republican votes were cast. Last night 248,485 votes were cast for the major candidates, that's about 7,000 more than in 2008.

Is that significant? Sure, because as Linda Fowler, professor of government at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, said on Midday yesterday, New Hampshire has been turning more purple than its traditional red. So an increase in turnout is pretty impressive.

Comment on this post

When the people speak to politicians

Posted at 12:08 PM on January 9, 2012 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

One of the great aspects of a long primary season, is the opportunity to hear what people -- not politicians -- have to say.

CNN has a great idea as the coverage moves to New Hampshire: Stick a microphone on the street, and allow people to speak to the candidates, although, admittedly, the candidates probably aren't going to hear it.

The New England accent is a bonus.

Ron Paul today walked off an interview with CNN when a reporter asked him why he wasn't spending more time meeting New Hampshire residents?

Ms. Bash, who was interviewing Mr. Paul a few feet away from a group of reporters, had posed a timely question: a few hours earlier, a middle-aged woman had become angry with Mr. Paul for not spending enough time talking to voters at a diner in Manchester.

The woman, an Obama voter last time who said she was open to voting for Mr. Paul, even approached Mr. Paul's S.U.V. as he prepared to drive off and began shouting at him through the closed car door to return to the diner and meet her and her mother.

People in New Hampshire are different than Iowa. They can be dangerous to a carefully scripted day.

Comment on this post

The politics of food stamps

Posted at 10:51 AM on January 9, 2012 by Bob Collins (9 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The topic du jour in the Republican presidential race is food stamps.

Several of the candidates, the Associated Press reports, want the food stamp program ended and the money given to states instead:

Both Gingrich and Santorum faced criticism this week when they spoke of overhauling food stamps and other welfare programs by seeming to equate food stamp recipients and blacks. Gingrich said he would encourage blacks to demand paychecks, not food stamps, and Santorum said that he did not want to "make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money. I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money."

It's a strategy that might play well in New Hampshire, a state that -- like Minnesota -- has a comparatively small number of people on food stamps. But this map, produced by the Wall St. Journal in 2011, shows the risk of the issue. Particularly in the south and many battleground states, about 18 percent of the people are on food stamps.

Could the states run the food stamp operation better with block grants? Last year, the Lawrence (Mass.) Eagle Tribune found that retailers are ripping off the program, largely because the states are terrible at monitoring it.

In New Hampshire, of the 883 stores that take food stamp cards, only 18 were disqualified from the program since 2006. The story was similar in Massachusetts, where just 228 of the 4,320 stores authorized to accept food stamps were disqualified. By 2009, 90 of those Massachusetts retailers were back on the list of authorized food stamp merchants and had collectively racked up more than $7 million in food stamp redemptions in that one year alone, records obtained from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the $50 billion program, show.

"The biggest problem we have here in Massachusetts is that we can't prosecute because there is no state statute," said one Bay State investigator who has assisted federal agents in retailer investigations. "We couldn't even bring a case against them."

Comment on this post

Ventura vs. a SEAL?

Posted at 10:26 AM on January 6, 2012 by Bob Collins (3 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Former Gov. Jesse Ventura is in the thick of another controversy, this time with a Navy SEAL who says the governor, who claims to be an ex-SEAL, disrupted the wake of a SEAL (Michael Monsoor) with loud talk about his opposition to the wars.

Chris Kyle told a Sirius XM Network show that he punched Ventura in the face in the 2006 incident. (Warning: There is an obscenity or two in this video)

The website, The Blaze, digs into the story a bit more, where commenters aren't buying the story.

The former governor has not yet responded to the allegations.

Comment on this post

Truth, lies, and campaign speeches

Posted at 12:55 PM on January 5, 2012 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Two separate comments from politicians and/or experts today raise an interesting question: Should you hold politicians accountable for what they say, if they say it at a campaign speech?

Appearing on CBS' Early Show today, Sen. John McCain was asked about a 2008 campaign speech in which he said of Mitt Romney, "never get into a wrestling match with a pig." Now, McCain is endorsing Romney.

"Did you not mean that four years ago or do you not mean it now?" the anchor asked.

"Primaries are tough," McCain said, not answering the question, but certainly inviting the conclusion that you can't take what a candidate says seriously on the campaign trail.

Meanwhile, PolitiFact reports today (h/t: Tom Scheck) that a spokesman for Ron Paul had a somewhat similar reaction when asked about an untrue statement the candidate delivered to a rally.

"Relax, dude, it was a rally speech to supporters, not a major policy speech or a debate," he said.

Comment on this post

The Cain interview

Posted at 12:39 PM on January 3, 2012 by Bob Collins (12 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

CBS has now posted its video from its strange interview this morning with Herman Cain, the presidential candidate with the suspended campaign.

In an unusual move, Cain campaigned to be secretary of defense in a Republican administration, then cited as one of the reasons he's qualified for the position, the fact he'd been on a Navy ship.

But the interview also exposed Cain's inquisitors as something less than adequate. Nora O'Donnell, a CBS White House reporter, asked Cain how many people are in the military, a clearly "gotcha" question. She agreed it was, then recited statistics that appear to be incorrect.

Comment on this post

Secrecy and the school board

Posted at 4:09 PM on December 22, 2011 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The best thing that ever happened to politicians may well be the ability to cite data practices law in Minnesota as the reason for their silence on controversial issues. Fewer laws, however well intended, have cast as much secrecy over the workings of local government.

A situation brewing in South Washington County is a perfect example. Last Thursday, to the surprise of school superintendent Mark Porter, the South Washington County School Board voted not to appoint him to another term, then refused to say why.

Check out the ground rules for discussing the decision as outlined by the board chair Leslee Boyd.

The vote also surprised school board members who supported Porter, who say they heard nothing in an executive session to warrant booting the superintendent, according to the South Washington County Bulletin:

"Mark Porter is a very nice man but we need to look at what we need in the future and what's the best for students, and this is how five of seven of us decided to proceed," (Board Member Marsha) Adou said later in an interview.

Kath thanked Porter for his service in a pre-written statement he read just before the vote.

"I feel the time is right to bring a new voice to lead us," Kath added, later refusing to elaborate on his decision.

Gelbmann called the non-renewal a bad move that could hamper the recruitment of a high-caliber replacement because candidates will wonder how the board operates.

Gelbmann is Deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann, a Porter supporter and member of the board.

Adou told the newspaper she's concerned about "a big difference" in student achievement between Caucasian students and minority students, and said the district has not been doing as much as it should to improve teacher evaluations, two topics that would make for a fine public debate, but which the board members say privacy laws disallow.

In an editorial this week, the newspaper noted that several of those running for re-election last month, said nothing to indicate they had any problems with the direction Porter provided.

And we can't help but note that Boyd and Kath mere weeks ago were re-elected following a campaign void of any publicly expressed concern by the candidates about the district's leadership. It's real hard to believe the reasons they had for deciding not to extend Porter's contract bubbled up in the past month. That would suggest they were not satisfied with Porter but for whatever reason decided that wasn't something voters should know.

Now, certainly state privacy laws limit public discussion of detailed personnel issues, but it appears some of those five board members want to use that as a convenient excuse for not explaining and defending their vote.

Residents of the district - and, by the way, voters who elected this board - deserve far more than that. To cut Porter loose without a solid explanation is puzzling and arrogant.

In that election, the school board race was the only item on the ballot. Few voters bothered to show up at the polls.

Comment on this post

Stand up for 'lame duck'

Posted at 1:10 PM on December 16, 2011 by Eric Ringham (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Eventually we'll know more about why Amy Koch decided to resign as majority leader, but for now we're stuck with the same story that everyone gives for leaving every job: More time with family, and/or exciting new opportunities. Here's how she put it: "I want to explore some other options. I want to spend a little time with my daughter." No surprise there, nor anything revealing.

But here's what caught my attention: Koch's assertion that she didn't think the Senate Republican caucus should be led by a lame duck. Huh? In what sense is she a lame duck?

Only in the sense that Sarah Palin was, when she resigned as governor of Alaska with a year and change left to her term. Those who care about language and the meaning of words have to speak up now, or "lame duck" - a useful term in talking about politics - will be lost forever.

The term refers to an officeholder who is on the way out because of term limits or a defeat at the polls. Here's a handy look at its origins, provided in podcast form by my colleagues Curtis Gilbert and Molly Bloom.

If "lame duck" meant what Koch and Palin are using it to mean, then every politician not planning to run again would be a lame duck. Robert Schlesinger at U.S. News and World Report made the point well a couple of years ago. Under Palin's logic, he wrote,

No president should run for a second term because they would instantly be a powerless lame duck, subjecting the country to four years of utter fecklessness. And if a president is then not going to run for a second term, they automatically become a lame duck as soon as they take office in their first term ... so they should not seek the presidency at all.

(I write this in full knowledge that there's a different word for people like me who struggle to keep language from changing: Dinosaurs. I wear the label proudly.)

Comment on this post

How a weak anti-bullying bill became law

Posted at 10:57 AM on December 7, 2011 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

This week, the U.S. Department of Education declared what most everybody knows: Minnesota's anti-bullying law is among the weakest in the nation.

MPR's Tom Weber reported yesterday:

The report finds Minnesota has just two of those components in place -- the lowest number in the nation, except for the four states without any law at the time of the report's writing.

The federal report notes Minnesota is one of just three states to prohibit bullying without defining it. Wisconsin is another. Researchers note a statewide definition is crucial, given the fact that bullying means different things to different people.

While politicians have been lining up in recent years to call for stronger anti-bullying legislation, few of them did anything about it back when it was passed in 2007, even though just about everybody told the lawmakers the law was junk.

In 2007, though, kids weren't getting the attention they're getting now when they kill themselves after being bullied. Few in the media paid any attention to the anti-bullying legislation being shepherded by then Sen. Mee Moua.

At the time, I was running the Minnesota Fantasy Legislature, a "game" that was created specifically so that legislation that was being ignored got some attention. The anti-bullying legislation was one such bill.

On the day the Senate passed the bill, I wrote this:

This morning, the Senate passed SF646, a piece of legislation that requires school districts to formulate a policy on bullying. For the record, I agree with the legislation. I've seen, firsthand, what bullying can do to kids. I'm aware that the incidents of school shootings almost always have their roots in bullying. So put me down as a "yes" vote.

But that's not the part of the bill that caught my attention. It was this:

The policy shall address intimidation and bullying in all forms, including, but not limited to, electronic forms and forms involving Internet use.

Come again?

I watched the Senate Education Committee testimony on this a week or so ago and while there was some rumblings from the minority party about such things as how a school committee can possibly police the off-school-premises and off-school-hours activities of students, squirreled away in their rooms at home... banging away on the Internet, for the most part the response was "we'll let the school boards figure that out."

It was a bad piece of legislation passed by legislators behaving badly by not providing any guidance or definition, even when they were told by people closer to the problem that it was bad legislation that did nothing but allow lawmakers to say they "took action" on bullying.

On the day the Minnesota Senate passed the bill, there was no debate. That day, it spent a considerable amount of time whether to rename a stretch of highway in Duluth after Walter Mondale.

Comment on this post

The voting booth is private, but the cash drawer is public

Posted at 2:00 PM on December 6, 2011 by Eric Ringham (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The news that Herman Cain has suspended his presidential campaign must be a blow to Scott, in ZIP code 55356, who donated $1,000 to Cain last September. Or to Don in 55304, who gave the same amount in May. On the other hand, the news must have brought cheer to the homes of Tom in 55347, who donated $1,250 to Newt Gingrich last May, and of Jody in 55359, who gave Gingrich's campaign $300 in August.

You think Facebook is addictive? Not compared to the Federal Election Commission's website. If the tobacco companies could have laced cigarettes with info from www.fec.gov, they wouldn't have needed menthol to help get people hooked.

David, 55438, gave President Obama's campaign $2,000 last June. Christopher, 55430, gave Obama $50 in July and $50 more in September. Likewise, Eleanor in 55408 contributed $10, $10, $100 and $20 to Obama, all in September.

Does this seem invasive? Don't answer yet; there's more. The available information includes donors' last names, cities of residence and occupations. It's all right there. The website's features include interactive maps for the presidential and congressional campaigns; users can zero in on Minnesota or any other state to see who gave what to whom. Here's what the Minnesota map of presidential contributions looks like:

A click on one of those circles takes the user to a list of individual contributors. If you're one of them, it's sure to make you uncomfortable. If not, it's likely to blow a hole in your productivity for the day.

Now, all this information is public, and properly so. Those who give money to political campaigns know, or should know, that the information is out there. What might take them by surprise is how easy it all is to find. On file at the county courthouse is one thing; available at a click of a mouse, from anywhere, is another.

If you didn't know this before, now you do. Use this power for good.

Comment on this post

Ever-diminishing benefits causing rash of retirements

Posted at 11:29 AM on December 6, 2011 by Molly Bloom (4 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Many state and local governments are seeing a "flood of retirements," due in part to a fear that retirement benefits will continue to diminish, according to this story in The New York Times.

The star of the Times story is Wisconsin. But Minnesota, Colorado and New Jersey are identified as three states that have both increased employee pension contributions and reduced the automatic cost-of-living adjustment on benefits.

Dave Bergstrom, who runs the Minnesota State Retirement System, told us that Minnesota is seeing a big increase in new state employee retirements. Bergstrom said 3,250 retirees were added to the rolls between Dec. 1, 2010 and Nov. 30, 2011 -- about 1,000 more than retired during the same period last year.

But Bergstrom attributes that increase to early retirement incentives and the fact that baby boomers are reaching retirement age -- not to the changes in benefits.

If you're a state employee, we'd like to hear what you're seeing. Are people retiring in your department? Are you considering it yourself? Why? Share your experiences here or in the comments.

Comment on this post

The Gingrich divorce

Posted at 10:50 AM on December 5, 2011 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Now that Newt Gingrich is the frontrunner du jour in the Republican presidential contest, the story about his divorce from his first wife is, again, fodder for his opponents.

This tweet this morning from Roger Ebert reopens the discussion.

At least Ebert didn't say Gingrich's wife was "dying," which several retellings of the story have.

Still, it's one of the factoids of the campaign season mostly stripped of context .

What's the full story? FactCheck.org has just posted it:

So, what do we know for certain? One, Battley and Gingrich were already separated and in the process of getting a divorce when he visited her in the hospital. And two, Battley wasn't dying of cancer. Also, the "yellow pad" and handwritten list of divorce terms mentioned in the original Mother Jones story aren't mentioned in the accounts given by Battley, Gingrich or Cushman, who all were present.

But even by Gingrich's account it was an unpleasant conversation at a time when his wife was hospitalized. Beyond that, the details of what was actually discussed remain cloudy, to say the least.

Here's the full post.

Comment on this post

The best and worst of Barney Frank

Posted at 10:58 AM on November 28, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Barney Frank, the combative Massachusetts Democrat, is announcing he won't run for re-election.

Frank is one of the most quoted politicians, partly because of his unusual ability to tell his constituents when they were wrong. This exchange with a constituent was classic Barney Frank.

Rep. Frank was an old-school debater, ignoring printed speeches in favor of off-the-cuff oratory, as in this exchange with Rep. Michele Bachmann in 2009 on the question of federal funds for ACORN.

But part of the representative's style was often to to belittle those asking the occasional good question. The late CNBC anchor Mark Haines, who rarely let a speech go unchallenged by any politician, proved more than Mr. Frank's equal in 2009.

Comment on this post

Minnesota sells the good china

Posted at 1:38 PM on November 17, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Economy, Politics

As part of the quick-fix solution to Minnesota's budget shortfall, lawmakers last spring decided to sell the state's tobacco settlement -- the windfall it made from its lawsuit against the tobacco industry in 1998 -- in the form of bonds. The state has now sold its windfall.

Basically, the state is playing the part of the people yelling out the window.

Anytime you sell future earnings, you're going to lose in the long run. The companies that bought the "bonds" have agreed to give the state a pile of cash now, in exchange for the state giving them two piles of cash later. The state will apply $640 million of the sale to erasing part of the state's budget deficit. For that, it will pay over $1.2 billion over 20 years, MPR's Tom Scheck reports.

Almost from the time the tobacco case was settled, politicians have fought over how the money would be used. Originally, Gov. Ventura and DFLers wanted to set up a public health endowment with $1 billion. The Republicans wanted to give it to taxpayers with a one-time tax cut.

The payments were to come from the tobacco companies into perpetuity and go into the state's General Fund. The first payment was about $100 million. By halfway through the last decade, it was estimated to be twice that. The state got about $169 million in 2011.

There were also six one-time payments between September 1998 and January 2003. They were to go to two endowment funds and one legislative account. They funded the Tobacco Use Prevention and Local Public Health Endowment, the Medical Education Endowment, and an Academic Health Center Account within the Medical Education Endowment, according to the House Research Department.

Over that time, adult smoking in Minnesota dropped from about 22 percent immediately after the tobacco settlement, to about 17% in 2007.

Comment on this post

Gov. Dayton's higher education mystery

Posted at 11:15 AM on October 28, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics, Schools

Maybe there's a reason the naming of Sen. Larry Pogemiller as the new director Minnesota Office of Higher Education came in a news release instead of a news conference. Otherwise, someone might've asked what the deal is with the old director?

Sen. Larry Pogemiller got the job, apparently because he "sat on committees on Education, Rules and Administration and Taxes," according to the release, which describes him as the "perfect choice for the Office of Higher Education."

That might be interpreted as a slap against the choice Gov. Mark Dayton made nine months ago. Sheila Wright actually had experience in higher education.

"Her nationally recognized leadership in education will help guide our administration's efforts to restore Minnesota to its former position of national leadership in making higher education more accessible, more affordable, and more responsive to the needs of Minnesota's college students," Gov. Mark Dayton said at the time.

Eight months later, she was gone, nobody said why, and few people are asking now.

At the time of her exit, the Star Tribune reported that a spokeswoman for her office said Wright cleared out her office, thanked the staff for their service and said goodbye in a move described as "fast, but cordial."

Gov. Dayton's spokesman, Bob Hume, delivered the word to the media that Wright was out, but refused to answer the question whether Gov. Dayton asked her to resign. That sort of non answer usually is code for "yes."

There's no indication Gov. Dayton was ever asked about the odd resignation in the month since it occurred, and if she was forced out because she wasn't right for the job, what does that say about the process that got her the job in the first place?

But even his political opponents haven't made any hay out of what appears to have been a bad appointment, indicating they either don't know (unlikely) or they've agreed to keep silent about the reasons.

The only criticism of Pogemiller's new position, appears to have come from a member of his own party -- Rep. Mindy Greiling.

She may have a point, with the appointment of Pogemiller, Dayton's cabinet becomes more white and more male. Only six of 25 cabinet members are women.

Pogemiller's appointment as the "perfect choice" because of his legislative experience suggests he'll get along better with the Republican-led Legislature. But it's no secret that Pogemiller has rarely been the best pal of his political opponents, although he may have more time in his new job to take them bowling.

Photo via Hamline University

Comment on this post

Why do people love Duluth?

Posted at 10:48 AM on October 28, 2011 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

As political ads go, Duluth City Council candidate Emily Larson has hit on a great formula: No political talk, just person after person extolling the virtues of Duluth. In fact, you don't even know you're watching a political ad until the end.

(h/t: Perfect Duluth Day)

Comment on this post

The Vikings' 'delusion'

Posted at 10:12 AM on October 18, 2011 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics, Sports

One can get a pretty good feel for the political will to build a football stadium for Zygi Wilf and his Minnesota Vikings by noting the opinions of some of the not-connected-to-the-Vikings-nor-politicians people who a reasonable person might expect would support the notion.

Rick Prescott, writer of the BallPark Magic blog, for example, makes clear he's not anti-stadium -- far from it, he says -- but he thinks the notion of a stadium in Arden Hills is "delusional."

But let's be clear about one thing. It's not hard to understand why that tract in Arden Hills would be Zygi's first choice. It's a ton of vacant land, at the intersection of two major interstates, which somebody else would buy and clean up for him and yet which he would control completely. It's a developer's wet dream.

If the stadium were built there, Zygi would be able to extract money from the fan base to his heart's content. Lots of money. For every little thing. Forever. $100 for a tailgating spot on game day? Count on it. $400 for a room at his hotel? Without a doubt. Just bear that in mind if you ever feel the urge to drool over the current proposal.

But don't worry. It's not going to happen. If you've followed the stadium saga even a little bit, it's also quite easy to spot why this plan has been dead in the water from day one. And there are a whole lot of reasons:

Where will the stadium end up? Probably the Farmer's Market site, Prescott figures.

Comment on this post

'We do,' but they don't

Posted at 12:11 PM on October 14, 2011 by Bob Collins (10 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Lost in all the coverage of Occupy Wall Street, is a protest that has been quietly going on over the last two weeks (ending today) in Asheville, North Carolina -- the We Do campaign.

There, same-sex couples have gone to the Buncombe County Register of Deeds Office every day to request a marriage license. Every day, of course, they've been denied.

Comment on this post

A city goes toes up

Posted at 11:27 AM on October 12, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Economy, Politics

You don't often see a capital city of a state declare bankruptcy. I'm not sure we've ever seen it before.

We've seen it now, a possible indication of the growing dysfunction of state and local governments.

Harrisburg, Pennsylvania is filing bankruptcy papers today, owing to a project to renovate a city incinerator.

The move also will be a test of who pays when a city goes belly up: The institutions who lent the money or the people who work for the city?

"The people who lent us money were in the business of lending money; they knew the risk," Harrisburg controller Dan Miller told CNBC, sounding unapologetic about becoming a municipal deadbeat.

"What have you done to the unions?" CNBC's Jim Cramer asked.

"We haven't done anything," Miller said. "In bankruptcy we'll have leverage. Our prior mayor signed five-year extensions just before he left office. They're supposed to get 4 to 5 percent raises a year."

It's been a long-time coming. The city has been trying to sell assets -- parking garages, for example -- to pay the bills, but now the state is threatening to take over the city.

On a wider scale, the move signals worry that municipal bonds, the engine that finances local government projects, may not be much of a safe bet anymore.

Comment on this post

Occupation defined

Posted at 10:30 AM on October 7, 2011 by Michael Olson (15 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Every now and again cable news becomes relevant. It never seems to be about the news it reports, but rather the news it makes. CNBC's Rick Santanelli's "rant heard around the world" was credited in helping to galvanize the Tea Party.

And now a segment from CNN's Erin Burnett mocking the Occupy Wall Street protests is helping to build sympathy for the protesters. She's called "vapid" within the pages of Forbes.

Her mocking search for what the protest is about seems to have helped the group frame Occupy Wall Street in a broader light.

Burnett's rude treatment of an unemployed software engineer provides a stark contrast to the popular Tumblr blog We are the 99% that features a sea of photos like this one from a diverse set of Americans in rough economic circumstances.

National Review's Josh Barrow quibbles with the groups math and seeks to reclaim that turf for conservatives.

As of this morning, Minneapolis has its very own Occupation. The movement has spread to many cities in the U.S. OccupyMN is expected to last over the weekend. The group gained additional mainstream credibility when Mayor RT Rybak added a sympathetic post to his blog.

Even this guy couldn't resist taking it to the streets.

While the higher-profile support drew in more visibility, it is concerning for some who want the protest to be decentralized.

Do you think the Occupy Wall Street protests will grow into a political force akin to the Tea Party?

Comment on this post

Whose fault is poverty?

Posted at 2:34 PM on October 5, 2011 by Bob Collins (20 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Now that he's registering a pulse in presidential polls, Herman Cain is getting more attention when he says something.

Today he said something that will probably define his candidacy, for however long it should last.

"Don't blame Wall Street, don't blame the big banks," he told the Wall St. Journal in an interview. "If you don't have a job and you are not rich, blame yourself!"

"When I was growing up, I was blessed with parents who didn't teach me to be jealous of anybody, or to be envious of anybody. It's not a person's fault because they succeeded, it's a person's fault because they fail," Cain said.

Cain was reacting to the Wall Street protests, which he said are organized to distract the nation from the "failed policies" of President Obama.

His comment, however, may serve the same purpose because it may spawn a renewed debate over whether it's the fault of poor people that they're poor, and whether the nation's 14 million people without work have no one to blame but themselves.

Comment on this post

Chris Christie presidential candidacy debated

Posted at 12:03 PM on September 27, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The danger of a presidential campaign that begins the moment the last one ends is the political media needs a story line every day for four years. Today's hot story is that New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie may get into the race.

The report comes after Texas Gov. Rick Perry, anointed the frontrunner by the same people who made Rep. Michele Bachmann and Gov. Mitt Romney the frontrunner before him, was embarrassed by about 1,000 delegates at the Florida Republican Party convention, who made Herman Cain the straw poll winner. Nobody not named Cain believes Herman Cain is going to be elected president.

The New York Times' Nate Silver suggests that the party is still a battle between moderates and conservatives, an intra-party squabble that seemed settled years ago.

One way to view the 2012 campaign is as an effort by the Republican Party to identify a viable, electable alternative to Mr. Romney. With other candidates, like Mr. Perry, potentially failing on the electability front, it is easy to see Mr. Christie's appeal. The fact that Mr. Christie's ideology is somewhat amorphous -- without, like Mr. Romney's, seeming slippery -- is a potential sign of strength, an indication that he may have the persuasive abilities to rally the party behind him, while also appealing to general election voters.

But as Jon Stewart pointed out last evening, Christie probably isn't the inside-Republican's cup of tea, either.

Comment on this post

Can Americans live without political theater?

Posted at 10:38 AM on September 22, 2011 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Media, Politics

When the Republican Party of Florida hosts a presidential debate tomorrow, many people will be listening to the candidates' answers, but they may be just as influenced by the audience's reaction, the Columbia Journalism Review says today.

Through a series of four experiments, the social scientists showed that when an audience cheers, applauds, or reacts favorably to a candidate, viewers are far more likely to hold a positive view of that candidate than had they watched the performance without an audience reaction.

Moments in which an audience reacts are also more memorable and more likely to be reported by the media; these moments, in turn, often become defining sound bites in a campaign season and provide a candidate momentum in the horse race. Ronald Reagan's "There you go again," (directed at Jimmy Carter) and Lloyd Bentsen's "You're no Jack Kennedy" (to Dan Quayle) are classic examples of these sorts of utterances.

"For the audience watching at home, these moments validate certain perspectives and can suggest to the audience that there is much more consensus about a particular point than there really is," Steven Fein, a social psychologist, says. "Just because people are louder doesn't mean it reflects popular opinion."

The problem primarily is also that the media captures these moments and that defines the debate. For example, when candidate Ron Paul was asked by the moderator whether a healthy 30-year-old who gets sick should simply die, some yahoo in the audience shouted, "yeah," and that's what got everyone's attention, and, hence, coverage.

But the first word in the candidate's answer was "no." Too late. The answer was defined by the coverage of the audience.

"What really concerns me is how much the media plays this as a sporting thing. It really sounds like a horse race or a baseball season," Fein says. There's this titillating quality to a lot of the coverage--all the bells and whistles and charts and 3-D things. It just cheapens the whole process and makes the emphasis on very superficial things. It becomes what reader and viewer comes to expect. With a little more substance it can make a bit of a difference, I think the audience is capable of more than more of what the media thinks they are."

Which brings up the obvious question: Is the audience capable of more than what the media thinks they are?

Comment on this post

How not to design a memorial to 9/11

Posted at 1:04 PM on September 14, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

From Department of What Were They Thinking: The politicians of Washington Township, New Jersey thought it would be a swell idea to have a marker honoring the victims of 9/11.

But the design mostly seems to honor the politicians who thought it would be a swell idea to have a marker honoring the victims of 9/11.

"I mean, how freaking narcissistic can you be?" Dennis Ryan, a retired cop in town, said on Tuesday.

Mayor Samir Elbassiouny told the Lehigh Valley News earlier this week he did not understand why the stone's inscription was an issue.

Today, it was removed.

Comment on this post

Obama as Captain America

Posted at 1:44 PM on September 9, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

NMA, the Taiwan animation outfit, is out with a video about President Obama's jobs speech last night:

Comment on this post

Are the State Fair poll results significant?

Posted at 1:02 PM on September 6, 2011 by Bob Collins (4 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Sixty-six percent of people answering the annual House of Representatives State Fair survey say Minnesotans should not ban same-sex marriage when they vote on a constitutional amendment in November 2012.

There's nothing scientific about the survey, although some other staunchly conservative positions had support in the same survey. (Following is corrected info) Take the voter ID question, for example. Nearly 50.8% percent of those surveyed supported requiring people to show a photo ID before voting, but that's down significantly from the last two years (about 70%). Has there been a shift in the sentiment on the issue, or was this year a somewhat more liberal crowd?

A fairly large majority also called for making Minnesota a "right to work" state.

But it doesn't appear the same-sex marriage survey has been included in other recent State Fair surveys, so it's difficult to determine whether there's been any shift one way or the other.

Does any of this make a difference at the Legislature? There's no indication it does, but it may be a fairly accurate reflection on how Minnesota votes.

Here are the highlights of previous surveys, some of which predicted the future; some of which did not.

2010: 66.4 percent said the public should not fund a new stadium for the Minnesota Vikings. That was a slight increase over the previous year.

2009: A slight majority -- 47.5% -- said the state lawmakers should cut its budget before raising taxes in times of economic distress. A year later, Republicans swept into power at the Legislature by promoting the philosophy.

2008: A slight majority -- 49% -- said the sales tax should be increased to fund environmental and arts programs. A few months later, voters passed the so-called Legacy Amendment 56-to-39 percent.

2007: About 58% said the gasoline tax should be raised to pay for transportation programs. Five months later, the Legislature raised the gasoline tax over the objection of then-governor Tim Pawlenty.

2006: 57% said immigrant students who are not here legally should not get the in-state tuition rate at state colleges and universities.

2005: 57.% said ticket scalping should not be legalized in Minnesota. A year-and-a-half later, Minnesota lawmakers legalized ticket scalping.

2004: 59% said smoking should be banned in restaurants and bars. In 2007, the Legislature banned smoking in bars and restaurants.

2003: 60.8% said the education budget should not be cut during times of financial distress. Lawmakers and governors have made delaying funds to K-12 education a cornerstone of their budget-balancing plans since.

Comment on this post

Glittering the Fair

Posted at 7:26 AM on September 5, 2011 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

At the Minnesota State Fair yesterday, a group opposed to a referendum to ban gay marriage in the state dropped glitter on a booth operated by a group that supports the measure.

The anti-gay-marriage group was given space at the Fair, which happened to be under the Sky Ride. The Sky Riders didn't have a booth so they dropped glitter, which they've been doing at events featuring referendum supporters.

A Fair spokeswoman told MPR's Sasha Aslanian the group opposed to the measure banning same-sex marriage didn't have a booth at the fair because it didn't register for one.

Comment on this post

When Republicans fight

Posted at 1:37 PM on September 1, 2011 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Republicans have done such an effective job of voting and legislating as a bloc that it's unusual to see them carp at one another. But a presidential campaign will do that, despite Ronald Reagan's 11th Commandment ("Never speak ill of another Republican.")

Today, Michele Bachmann's super-PAC rolled out this broadside against Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who's stolen much of her thunder since jumping into the presidential race.

We're not sure who the narrator is in the piece, but we're pretty sure he's faking the unrecognizable accent that's a cross between Wilfred Brimley and Tom Bodett.

Comment on this post

What's a state got to do to get a little presidential love?

Posted at 11:42 AM on September 1, 2011 by Bob Collins (4 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

A colleague, who has kin in Vermont, pointed out this morning that President Barack Obama isn't touring Vermont when he makes the traditional presidential "I care" visit that accompanies national disasters. Obama will tour Patterson, New Jersey on Sunday, which has been particularly hard hit in the wake of Irene.

But so has Vermont. About 13 towns remained cut off after the roads were washed away, and the National Guard was bringing in supplies of food and water, in some cases by helicopter.

Truth be told, presidential visits have no real value other than maybe giving a morale boost to people and certainly providing some favorable political footage on the nightly news. The administration has already sent various underlings in emergency management agencies to all of the states affected.

But Obama has never visited Vermont as president (his wife did last spring). And George Bush missed one state in all of his years in office. Guess which one?

The state didn't exactly put the welcome mat out for the guy.

Brattleboro, the poster community for this latest disaster, is famously weird and could make for uncomfortable questions for a visiting president. In two towns on town meeting day years ago, residents approved resolutions calling for the indictment of President Bush and Vice President Cheney for violating the Constitution. One of the towns? Brattleboro.

The last time a sitting president visited Vermont was 1995 when President Bill Clinton had no choice. He wanted to speak to the National Governor's Association and it was holding its gathering in Vermont? Why? Howard Dean chaired the NGA. He was also the governor of Vermont.

Comment on this post

The $120-a-word speech

Posted at 2:24 PM on August 30, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

President Obama made no news today when he spoke to the American Legion convention in Minneapolis.

But he really didn't have much choice but to get on a helicopter, fly to the local Air Force base, get in Air Force One to fly halfway across the country, motorcade to downtown Minneapolis, give a short speech, motorcade back, fly back, and helicopter back to the White House. Not showing up would have been political suicide. He already was criticized for not going to the VFW convention, and the perks of the presidency allow you to make political niceties on the company dime. That's the way it's been for years.

How many dimes? The White House, of course, never says. Even when it rebutted Michele Bachmann's (false) claim that a trip to India cost $200 million, it steadfastly refused to say how much it did cost.

But McClatchey Newspapers took a stab at it back in 2009.

The costs of the trips -- borne by taxpayers -- are difficult to measure, but they're expensive. When he uses the familiar blue-and-white reconfigured 747 as Air Force One, it costs $100,219 an hour to operate, according to the Air Force. And that's just HIS plane.

There also are cargo planes, used to fly in armored limousines, helicopters, staff and other equipment, as well as the Secret Service. A single Air Force C-17 cargo jet, for example, costs $6,960 an hour, according to the Congressional Research Service.

A total of 77 other aircraft were used on one multi-country trip to Asia by former President Bill Clinton in 2000, according to the Air Force Times, including 14 C-17 Globemasters, 12 C-5 Galaxys, three C-141 Starlifters and two C-130 Hercules.

Most of those wouldn't be needed for a short hop to Minneapolis so many of those costs could be discounted. There might have been a C-17 bringing the limousines here, but if it wasn't flying here, it'd probably be flying somewhere else since the pilots fly often to stay sharp.

So just using the $100,219-per-hour figure, and calculating a three-hour trip here and a two-hour trip back, suggests a minimum cost of $501,095.

There were 4,187 words in the speech today, which works out to $119.67 per word.

There are 10,000 convention delegates, according to the Star Tribune. If they'd all walked up to the ticket counter at Minneapolis St. Paul and bought a one-day, roundtrip to Washington to hear the president and allow him to stay put, it would have cost $14.5 million.

So the whole arrangement saved everyone about $14 million.

Comment on this post

Blogger apologizes for doctoring Bachmann video

Posted at 11:14 AM on August 30, 2011 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

A phony video purporting to show Rep. Michele Bachmann asking an Iowa crowd, "who likes white people?" has been pulled from YouTube.

Bachmann made an appearance at a Christian Music Festival in Des Moines earlier this month. This is the actual appearance:

But a blogger at On Knees For Jesus admits today that he edited the video so that her actual line -- "who likes wet people?" -- would sound like she was asking "who likes white people?".

Today, he apologized and removed the video:

"I want to apologize for misusing Stacey Robert McCain's original video (click here). I was angry so I decided to take Mrs. Bachmann's line out of context to make her seem more overtly racist in light of her recent signing of that Iowa marriage pledge that said black children were better off under slavery than in Obama's America. Whether or not I dislike Michele Bachmann, it wasn't right to deliver a dishonest blow like that. I wanted to apologize to Mr. McCain and all of you directly. This blog is dedicated to showing Christ's love through his followers. By posting something misleading, I undermine my own purpose."

Too late. Many websites took the bait. Daily Kos, the community website for liberals, was one as this cached version of its page shows.

But after it was revealed it was faked, the website pretended it didn't...

A more appropriate response would have been to acknowledge the mistake and apologize to the candidate for making it.

Comment on this post

GOP banned from Labor Day parade

Posted at 11:10 AM on August 29, 2011 by Bob Collins (21 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

In our neighboring state of Wisconsin, Wausau has banned Republicans from marching in this year's Labor Day parade, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports. The parade is sponsored by Marathon County Central Labor Council.

"Usually they've been in the parade, but it seems like they only want to stand with us one day a year, and the other 364 days they don't really care," said Randy Radtke, president of the council.

In a statement, Radtke added that the parade is intended to celebrate working men and women and what the labor movement has given them: weekends, a 40-hour workweek, child labor protection and a safe working environment.

"It should come as no surprise that organizers choose not to invite elected officials who have openly attacked worker's rights or stood idly by while their political party fought to strip public workers of their right to collectively bargain," Radtke said.

Rep. Sean Duffy, a Republican, took exception.

"Having walked in this parade in past years, Congressman Duffy was hoping that for a moment, we could set our differences aside and simply have some fun in a family-friendly event," he said in a statement posted on WAOW.com.

(Photo: The 2010 Wausau Labor Day parade via Flickr)

Comment on this post

Are contributions to same-sex marriage campaigns a waste of money?

Posted at 12:27 PM on August 26, 2011 by Michael Olson (8 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

"Citizen Input" by Dave Glad via MPR's Flickr pool

The proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage is dominating political talk at the State Fair reports MPR's Sasha Aslanian. Passion is strong on both sides of the issue, political observers estimate campaign spending could reach and even surpass $10 million before voters cast ballots next year.

You could double that campaign spending and would still be unlikely to sway voters from the position they currently hold on same-sex marriage.

NYU's Patrick Egan has studied similar measures addressing same-sex marriage in 33 states since 1998 and found that campaigns to change public opinion on the issue are ineffective.

But what's $10 million today anyway? It's just a wedding for Kim Kardashian or a grilled cheese for a venture capitalist.

Comment on this post

What elected leaders know

Posted at 9:14 AM on August 23, 2011 by Michael Olson (12 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

A campaign is underway by the conservative-leaning Employment Policies Institute to raise awareness about debt reduction. The group's Defeat the Debt effort says that of all members of congress, "over three-quarters lack an academic background in business or economics." The number is based on an examination of college degrees held by members of the U.S. Congress.

Is this the educational background you'd like to see of congress?

Comment on this post

Calling ignorance what it is

Posted at 12:35 PM on August 4, 2011 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics, Race

The video of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie defending an appointment to the New Jersey Superior Court is starting to catch fire on the Intertubes.

Sohail Mohammed, 47, was sworn into the job last week, despite criticism that a Muslim judge could lead the way to the influence of Sharia law.

Christie didn't mix words about what was at work in the criticism.

Christie is rumored to be interested in running for president someday.

"So now it's for sure --he ain't running," a local commenter on Facebook noted today.

Comment on this post

Stump speeches vs. solutions

Posted at 11:20 AM on July 29, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

One of the difficulties of covering the debt crisis in Washington is politicians are better at giving stump speeches than providing solutions.

"We need solutions and not deals," Rep. Tim Huelskamp told CNBC this morning.

On the debt he said, "We gotta find a way to bring that down."

Those are exactly the kind of things that a politician would say if he's running for office and giving a speech at the Rotary Club. But they're not (a) a solution or (b) a way to bring that down which are what you're supposed to provide once you're elected to office.

The representative said his solution is "cut, cap, and balance." Cut the spending immediately (he didn't say what), cap future spending (he didn't say where), and pass a balanced-budget amendment (he hasn't filed such a bill, though it's worth noting that Speaker John Boehner has added such an amendment to his solution.).

Huelskamp called his proposal "a compromise."

"How can you say it's a compromise if no one else is going to bite?" a CNBC anchor asked.

"Where's Harry Reid's compromise?" Huelskamp responded, which -- if you look carefully -- doesn't answer the question asked.

And while Huelskamp is a Tea Party member, this method of communication is favored by almost all politicians currently engaged in this "crisis;" allegations rather than answers, stump speeches rather than details.

Give credit to CNBC's David Faber, one of the few CNBC on-air questioners with a spine, who insisted on details to the stump speech, pointing out , for example, that half of the stimulus package that Huelskamp objects to was tax cuts that Huelskamp embrace.

But it was a wasted effort ...

Huelskamp said the problem is Washington's status quo, which he unintentionally demonstrated, though perhaps not in the way he imagined.

You can watch the full interview here or just wait until the next politician is interviewed about the debt crisis.

Comment on this post

How to play chicken

Posted at 3:03 PM on July 28, 2011 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

We've often referred to the standoff between Minnesota -- and now, national -- politicians as "a game of chicken," but what's the psychology behind playing this game?

The Associated Press has gone to the scientists to figure it out. The most interesting observation in the article -- which you can find here -- is it helps if one size is crazy. I'll leave it to you determine if we should check that off of our list of requirements met.

Another way to win: throw the steering wheel out the window and make sure the other side knows it and will be forced to flinch. Shapiro thinks that's happened in Washington, but American University international studies professor Joshua Goldstein disagrees.

Goldstein, who has written a book chapter about the chicken game in diplomacy, said the side that has the least to lose is more believable when it threatens to ditch the steering wheel and go for broke: "It gives the weaker party more negotiating power."

In this situation, tea party followers have more credibility in their throw-the-wheel-out threats and President Barack Obama, who wants to be re-elected, can't play consequences-be-damned, he said.

The game of chicken "has to be dangerous in order to give people the incentive to cooperate. It helps if you are crazy or if you pretend to be crazy," Goldstein said.

Now, if anyone knows of an expert in the science of "kick the can," let me know.

Comment on this post

The Congress you have tried to reach...

Posted at 1:39 PM on July 26, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

In the wake of last night's call by President Obama for people to contact their congresspeople to urge a solution to the country's debt crisis, a lot of people apparently are. The U.S. House of Representatives Web site has crashed. Its front page is available, but the individual member sites are not.

Getting through by telephone isn't much easier. An e-mail from the House call center said the phone lines to the Capitol are jammed:

"Due to the high volume of external calls, House telephone circuits serving 202-225-XXXX phone numbers are near capacity resulting in outside callers occasionally getting busy signals," the email said.

In an age of voicemail, when's the last time you heard a busy signal?

Comment on this post

Report: Bachmann benefited from loan program she campaigns against

Posted at 12:43 PM on July 26, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Washington Post is reporting this afternoon that presidential candidate Michele Bachmann benefited from a federally-back home loan program she's railed against on the campaign trail.

Just a few weeks before Bachmann called for dismantling the programs during a House Financial Services Committee hearing, she and her husband signed for a $417,000 home loan to help finance their move to a 5,200-square-foot golf course home, public records show. Experts who examined the loan documents for The Washington Post say they are confident that the loan was backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac.
...

Bachmann bought a home in the upscale Stillwater community on Aug. 29, 2008, as she campaigned for a second congressional term, paying $760,000 and financing $666,999, records show.

Three experts who examined the mortgage documents say it appears the Bachmanns put down about $93,001 or 12 percent. Experts said the downpayment would have been fairly common in 2008; most lenders now require at least 20 percent.

The couple's previous home was still on the market at the time and had two loans outstanding. When the house sold a few months later for $334,423, the Bachmanns paid off whatever remained on two prior equity loans for $100,000 and $200,000, records show.

Did the Bachmanns benefit from a program the congresswoman wants to scuttle for other would-be homebuyers?

"The Congresswoman's personal financial disclosures will speak for themselves," her spokesman said. She hasn't released them yet.

Comment on this post

The Gangs of Washington, D.C.

Posted at 12:34 PM on July 21, 2011 by Eric Ringham (2 Comments)
Filed under: History, Politics

In the beginning was the Gang of Four, a group of radicals close to Mao Zedong in the last years of his life. One of those radicals was Mao's wife, Jiang Qing. The Gang of Four - not to be confused with the post-punk rock band of the same name - was blamed for many of the excesses of the Cultural Revolution, a major spasm of repression that helped China remain a basket case longer than it needed to be.

After Mao died in 1976 the gang was arrested and put on trial. That pretty well ended its influence -- except in the United States, where any group of people trying to accomplish any policy initiative now is known as "the Gang of X," where X equals the number of people involved.

The current plan to resolve the federal debt stalemate is the work of the Gang of Six. In 2005, an attempt by a different group of senators to resolve a crisis over filibusters and avoid the "nuclear option" was ascribed to the Gang of 14. One member of that Gang of 14 was Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who also happened to be a member three years later of the Gang of 10, which tried to reform energy policy.

The Gang of Three comprised a trio of New York state senators who wanted to exert political influence out of proportion to their number. The Gang of 18 represents scientists opposed to global warming skeptics. And a third Gang of Four - after the original Chinese gang and the rock band - isn't even made up of people, but of giant Internet firms (Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google).

Seems like a strange legacy for a quartet of deceased Chinese Communist hard-liners. I'm sure they'd find it comforting, though. Otherwise, the Cultural Revolution would be, like, a total loss.

Comment on this post

One person's pork

Posted at 6:13 AM on July 21, 2011 by Michael Olson (10 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The New York Times is reporting on a handful of spending requests by members of Congress that campaigned on less spending and smaller government.

Rep. Michele Bachmann's support for the $700 million to build a new Stillwater bridge is one of the examples reporter Ron Nixon focused on. He examines the reasoning behind the request and how it isn't technically an earmark.

On the Minnesota-Wisconsin border, local officials and members of Congress have pushed for a new four-lane bridge over the St. Croix River that was co-sponsored by Representative Sean P. Duffy, a Wisconsin freshman Republican, and Representative Michele Bachmann, the three-term Minnesota Republican who is running for president.

Opponents labeled the bridge an earmark, but Mr. Duffy and Mrs. Bachmann said the bridge was critical to handle increased traffic that an 80-year-old bridge nearby can no longer handle alone. They defend the spending by arguing that it was not an earmark since there were no specific costs listed in the bill itself, nor is it a financing bill. The legislation calls only for a bridge to be built.

Nixon doesn't mention the broad support among regional Democrats and Republicans for a new bridge.

Do you view the Stillwater bridge request as an example of government pork?

Comment on this post

As if on cue ...

Posted at 1:14 PM on July 20, 2011 by Eric Ringham (3 Comments)
Filed under: Media, Politics

Gov. Dayton's office has released an official photo of this morning's budget signing, with an appropriate, on-message expression of distaste on the Democratic faces.

After all, a person shouldn't smile when he's doing something loathsome.

Comment on this post

Tweet roundup: shutdown ends, what's next?

Posted at 10:25 AM on July 20, 2011 by Michael Olson (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The slow processes of restarting government begins. One of the 22,000 laid-off state employees rejoices.

Governor Dayton continued to project a tone of compromise.

While there seems to be a general sense of appreciation that the government and government services will be back to full swing, the deal still stings for some.

Recriminations and finger pointing resume.

Put it on a stick and fry it.

Comment on this post

Special session under way

Posted at 3:22 PM on July 19, 2011 by Michael Olson (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Minnesota Senate and House are meeting this afternoon. Gov. Mark Dayton called the special session with the goal to end the longest shutdown of the state government by reaching an agreement on a budget.

We are covering the details of the bills on the Shutdown 2011 blog.

Here are the proposed bills.

Given the divergent approaches to governing seen among state leaders, is there anything in the bills you think that should be prioritized, or is there something there that you think should be opposed that would have a chance of getting support?

Comment on this post

Gould almighty

Posted at 5:45 PM on July 19, 2011 by Michael Olson (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

It ain't all good in Gould, Ark. Political discourse in the small tornado-prone town has reached a low point. A point so low, it probably violates the U.S. Constitution.

A fracas between members of the city council and the mayor resulted in the passage of an ordinance that forbids the formation of a group without the approval of the city council.

This comes after other restrictive ordinances, reports the New York Times. The council attempted to reel in the perceived outsized influence of the Gould Citizens Advisory Council, an organization the mayor is active in, by passing an ordinance that would forbid the mayor to meet with groups inside or outside the city of Gould.

The advisory council, which calls itself a nonpartisan group that educates voters and raises money for public causes, says it will continue its work. But the City Council, in one ordinance, accused the group of "causing confusion and discourse among the citizens" by harshly criticizing local officials at public meetings. (NYT)

One council member says the ordinances should be re-written with "more constitutionally sensitive wording."

Comment on this post

Everybody talks about Kick the Can, but nobody plays it

Posted at 5:00 AM on July 19, 2011 by Eric Ringham (4 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The other day in one of our meetings, a member of the MPR News staff suggested that the next person who used the phrase "kick the can" should suffer corporal punishment. Or maybe it was capital punishment. Either way, the talk got me to thinking.

I'm pretty sure that the dime-store political analysis - "All we did was kick the can down the road" - has nothing to do with the actual game of Kick the Can. The phrase conjures the image of a boy walking down a road, kicking a can ahead of him as he goes. It is a metaphor for pointless action that postpones a problem instead of solving it, unless somewhere down that road there's a recycling station.

But maybe we should think of the budget negotiations as a game of Kick the Can, instead. I looked up the rules, and it turns out there are a few similarities:

1. Like the state budget negotiations, Kick the Can is a game of one against many. One player is "It," and everybody else hides. By now, I'm guessing that Mark Dayton has an intimate understanding of how it feels to be "It."

2. There is a deadline. "It" has to count to 30, or 50, or some other agreed number, while the hiders seek cover behind trees and parked cars. If, by the deadline, the hiders have not finished their work of finding a place to hide, nothing much happens.

3. The game is addictive. Players have been known to disappear for long periods of time while the rest of the state is holding dinner for them.

Now we're at the part of the game when the players have yelled, "Come on, Mom! We're almost done! Just let us finish this one game and then we'll be in, we promise." And Mom, trusting soul, has ladled out the soup and started making plans to open the state parks.

The soup is starting to cool, Mom is wondering whether she's been had, and pretty soon the voters are going to be in a mood to ground somebody.

Comment on this post

The morning after

Posted at 1:02 PM on July 15, 2011 by Eric Ringham (2 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Who was it who said that success has a hundred fathers, but failure is an orphan? In the wake of the Minnesota budget deal, voters may be looking to file a paternity suit. It sounds as if most political leaders whose fingerprints are on this agreement are trying to make clear just how repulsive they personally find the thing.

Allow me to make a prediction: Gov. Mark Dayton's emphasis on agreeing to a deal he did not agree with is going to come back to haunt him. Finely parsed distinctions between one preposition and another do not come from a place of political strength, as John Kerry learned with "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it." It smacks of hair-splitting, like Bill Clinton's "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

In Washington, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell floated a plan to give President Obama authority to raise the debt ceiling over Republican objections because a) he knows it has to be raised, and b) he wants his party to be able to avoid the blame for raising it. Not exactly Nathan Hale stuff, but very much in bipartisan step with the spirit of our times. Here in Minnesota, Dayton's own party shows no interest in agreeing - on, with, to or about - his initiative.

It may be petty to point this out, but we came from people who understood the value of standing up for things - of pledging "our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor." Are we still the sort of people who could put our names on a dangerous political document, and hang the consequences? Discuss.

And no, I did not just compare the budget deal to the Declaration of Independence.

Comment on this post

Consider the can kicked

Posted at 6:16 PM on July 14, 2011 by Eric Ringham (10 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Photo by Aldor, via Flickr

It's all over but the legislating and the voting and the second-guessing. The governor and his negotiating partners in the Legislature emerged from a three-hour meeting to say they have a deal. So now they'll make a little legislative magic and presto - we'll have a functioning state again.

The downside is that the problem will be back in about a week. The funding mechanisms in the deal don't solve anything, they just move numbers around. As the most popular phrase in politics goes, they've just kicked the can down the road. In other words, we'll soon be able to go fishing - but we're still up a creek.

Do kids even play Kick the Can anymore? Or is there an app for that?

Comment on this post

If you were the GOP leadership, what would you do now?

Posted at 2:25 PM on July 14, 2011 by Eric Ringham (17 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

So who would you rather be right now, in the state shutdown saga? The Democratic governor, or the Republican leadership in the Legislature? All the buzz for the past couple of hours has been about the crisis possibly being over. Now the Republicans are heading into a meeting with the governor where they will have to say ... something. Do they accept the deal, including the governor's conditions? Or do they try to hold out for something better? And if they do try to hold out - for example, by hanging onto just a little social policy, or a teensy cut in the state workforce - what then? Will they get stuck with all the blame for the shutdown past Day 15? Discuss.

Meanwhile, up-to-the minute coverage on the news stations and MPRNews.org continues.

Comment on this post

Dayton makes a move

Posted at 11:06 AM on July 14, 2011 by Eric Ringham (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

As far as I know, there's no response yet from the Republican leadership to Gov. Mark Dayton's announcement that he's ready to accept one of the GOP's pre-shutdown offers. But the time had clearly come for some kind of resolution: The beer supply was in jeopardy. To make sure you've got the latest on the story, go to the MPR News Shutdown Blog and keep your mouse on the Refresh button.

Comment on this post

Smile! You're on 'Candid Camera'

Posted at 2:20 PM on July 13, 2011 by Eric Ringham (5 Comments)
Filed under: Media, Politics

We will pay, sooner or later, for our growing acceptance of hidden cameras and other deceptive practices in newsgathering. The latest target is the Christian counseling business owned by Michele Bachmann and her husband, Marcus Bachmann. Previous targets of such tactics have included Planned Parenthood, National Public Radio, ACORN and the Rev. Tom Brock.

The ethics grow murky when journalists misrepresent themselves to get a story. Sometimes it may be the only way, but at other times it's just the easiest way. When is it justified - to expose hypocrisy? To report on a threat to health and safety? To get good film for Sweeps Week?

"If you talk to three different ethicists, you'll get three different responses," says Prof. Jane Kirtley, who teaches ethics at the University of Minnesota's journalism school. There is no clear line, she said, but she articulated the danger well: If we tell readers that we lied to get a story, how can they trust that we're telling the truth about everything else?

Lots of media organizations would turn away in a huff from a reporter who wanted to carry a hidden camera and a faked identity into a mental health clinic. So why is it better or more ethical to publish the work of an activist/freelancer who did the same thing? That's becoming the pattern. ABC News didn't send an investigative reporter to get this story -- but used its "investigative correspondent" to present the story and supplemental material, after John Becker of Truth Wins Out did the dirty work.

In the Bachmann Clinic case, the bar is arguably lower because one of the owners is running for president. If the clinic is using "reparative therapy" to undo the sexual orientation of gay clients - and swimming against the tide of credible professional opinion - that's news. It would probably be news even if Michele Bachmann were not running for president, because the clinic gets public funds.

But as Prof. Kirtley points out, now that everybody has a mass communications device in his pocket, mainstream media have little to trade on but their own credibility. We should be careful about giving it away.

In the meantime, let's take a minute to enjoy the old days, when the mainstream media really knew how to use hidden cameras:

Comment on this post

Is this Heaven? No, it's Iowa

Posted at 12:42 PM on July 12, 2011 by Eric Ringham (22 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Andrew Huff via Flickr

One of the early answers to Today's Question echoes a theme that we'll probably see more of as the shutdown drags on:

"I am going to need a new job come November," writes Maria Swora. "I was getting help through a workforce center. Now my career counselor is out of work. My need for a job is such that I am willing to relocate. If this drags on, I may have to."

I never wanted to live anywhere except Minnesota. But last weekend I drove to Iowa and discovered a few features of life there that seemed suddenly ... appealing. This may seem a mite premature, but just in case Minnesota never gets its groove back, shouldn't we have a Plan B? Mine might be Iowa. Here are a few reasons that living there might not be so bad.

1. Wind energy. Almost as soon as you cross the state line, you get a glimpse of what turbines look like in a state that does wind power whole hog. Vast wind farms seem to stretch from one horizon to the other. Smaller turbines power individual homes and businesses here and there, and altogether the graceful machines produce as much as 20 percent of the state's electricity.

2. A state budget surplus. Did you get that? A state budget surplus. (For the Minnesota reader, a state budget surplus occurs when the state government's revenue exceeds its expenses - in other words, when it has enough money to meet all of its financial obligations and even has a bit left over.) Today's commentary is an editorial from the Ames Tribune. Money quote, so to speak:

In fact, the Cyclone State is now sitting on a $480 million surplus. ... the approved budget will use roughly half of that total, leaving about $265 million sitting in the bank at the end of fiscal year 2012. It's important to note that this surplus is in addition to the state's rainy day fund, which has a healthy $430 million in it.

3. The Decorah Eagles. If you spent the second quarter of 2011 watching the Raptor Resource Project's webcam, you know what I mean. If not, start watching the project's Facebook page now so you'll have a comfortable perch when the next nesting season starts in the fall. You'll never want to watch another reality show.

4. The Iowa caucuses. Voters in Iowa get first crack at the presidential contenders every four years. More often than that, actually; Jimmy Carter basically lived there for a year. The preliminary event, the Ames straw poll, is just a month away. In short, Iowa voters get all the attention from the national candidates that they could possibly want, and then some. Minnesota mostly gets ignored, except when a national political convention comes to town. But by then everybody's mind is made up, anyway.

5. Grant Wood. If you Google "Iowa painter," he pops right up in the first or second spot. If you Google "Minnesota painter," you get a series of listings for house painters.

6. The Bridges of Madison County. There used to be 19 of them; today there are six. I haven't seen them, but they must be pretty nice to be so famous.

This is a partial list. I didn't even mention John Wayne's birthplace, the Coralville Reservoir or the Iowa Writer's Workshop. Let alone Nordic Fest at Luther College. And no, none of that is the equal of Minnesota, when Minnesota has its head screwed on straight. As it will, once again. Any day now.

Comment on this post

Corporate jet loophole: The president fights against the president

Posted at 11:21 AM on July 11, 2011 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The words "corporate jets" came up again in President Barack Obama's news conference today.

"What we have talked about is that starting in 2013, that we have gotten rid of some of these egregious loopholes that are benefiting corporate jet owners or oil companies at a time where they're making billions of dollars of profits," he said.

It's a recent conversion for the president, who has identified corporate jet travel as something for fat cats. How did these fat cats get the break? President Obama gave it to them.

He signed the Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization and Job Creation Act of 2010. Among its components was the ability of corporations to depreciate the cost of a corporate jet 100% in the year it is purchased, rather than over five years. The net effect is about a 40% reduction in cost.

Now, the president refers to this as a "tax loophole."

The beneficiaries of the loophole are corporate jet manufacturers Gulfstream (about 7,000 are employed in Georgia) and Cessna (which has made Wichita a company town).

Their trade group is fighting a perception problem, reports the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

The industry argues that it does not necessarily conform to a "fat cat" generalization. Most business flights carry midlevel staffers rather than chief executives, and many fly into airports without commercial airline access. One of the more common purchases is the Cessna Citation Sovereign, priced at roughly $17.5 million.

"People would be very surprised if they knew how many small-turbine and piston powered aircraft are used by businesses every day all across America," said Steve Champness, president of the Atlanta Aero Club. "Corporate aircraft give American businesses an advantage over the rest of the world."

The companies, however, seem to acknowledge that they can't prove a link between the accelerated depreciation and the number of jobs in the industry, a fact which also might undermine the notion that tax breaks are linked to jobs at all.

Mark Schmitt, senior fellow at the Roosevelt Institute, writes in the New Republic that the "corporate jet" focus sends the wrong message when it comes to taxes:

Call it economic populism on the cheap. By narrowing in on a single sharp example -- jets, Paris Hilton, Bermuda inversions -- these metaphors let Democrats grab a bit of the pitchfork tone of populism, while still protecting their ability to fly up to the Hamptons over the weekend on a donor's plane to assure their hedge-fund supporters that they certainly don't mean them, the dear friends whose contributions to economic dynamism they so admire and respect.

Modified, limited populism is probably the worst of both worlds. And in so narrowing the scope of the argument, Democrats also misrepresent the substance of their policies, in self-destructive ways. Their metaphors make it sound like taxes are more of a penalty for the grossest extremes of fat-cat America, rather than obligations that all of us share, relative to our ability to contribute. The insistence that any tax increases should affect only households earning more than $250,000 is similar. It leads, predictably, to families with two incomes just edging over the quarter-million mark protesting that they aren't really that rich and shouldn't be punished.

So where do all of these fat cats fly to? The Wall St. Journal last month created a database of corporate flights. But most of the database doesn't include flights in 2011 because corporations have elected to block their aircraft from being tracked.

Comment on this post

The shutdown and child care

Posted at 3:00 PM on July 8, 2011 by Bob Collins (19 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

After MPR reporter Sasha Aslanian's story aired today about the problems being faced by people who depend on a child care subsidy, we received several stories from people who have described the impact of the state shutdown.

The most compelling comes from Leslie Eck of Saint Paul:

I am a single mother of a soon-to-be-three-year-old girl. I had my daughter during my junior year of college and her father abandoned us when she was two weeks old. I graduated from the University of Minnesota just over a year ago with a B.S. in microbiology; however, I couldn't have done it without a little help from Minnesota.

I used public assistance including WIC, food stamps, Medicaid, and childcare assistance to help subsidize my family's cost of living while finishing my degree. I have been employed as a contract laboratory worker at 3M now for a year, and I am almost completely independent from any form of state assistance, except for child care.

As a contract worker, I only make 50-60 percent of what 3M pays the contract house toward my hourly wage. In other words, I don't make a lot. I work 50+ hours a week without receiving overtime pay in hopes that I will earn my keep and a permanent position within the company.

Because of the extensive hours I need to work to pay my bills, I use a daycare center with longer hours rather than home daycare (which would be much cheaper, but couldn't meet my busy work schedule needs).

Now, with the shutdown darkening our doorstep and no more child care assistance coming in, I will have to pull my daughter from her center (which I love and she has been going to for over two years. Other mothers will understand how painful this is!), and count on my mother, who is on unemployment and laid off from her job, to help me with the cost of care.

I find it infuriating that so many people accuse working families using childcare assistance as being "free-loaders" and using other citizens' hard-earned money via income taxes to subsidize our lives. Without child care assistance. I couldn't even work to pay my fair share of taxes, let alone contribute to the economy by paying my bills.

Think of it this way: the taxes I end up paying from my paycheck go right back into my own child care costs.

I am working diligently towards my goal of a non-contract, full-time position so I no longer need any form of assistance to pay for my living expenses. But in the meantime, I could use a little help from my neighbors in the great state of Minnesota. I try hard to give back to my community in so many ways. I am a volunteer at clinics and nursing homes through my church. I plan events in my neighborhood, and I am doing my best everyday to make ends meet for my family.

So I am asking people in Minnesota who still care about these issues to stand up for your neighbors, family, and friends who need help. My family is not the only one suffering through this shutdown.

We heard from another listener from East Bethel on the shutdown coverage:

I hear over and over about people that are angry about the state shutdown. Why do I never hear from those that are happy the state isn't able to spend its taxpayers' hard-earned dollars? I hear from only those grabbing money from their neighbors' pockets, why aren't we hearing from those who resent being statutorily thieved from?

And that's where we are in the shutdown debate.

Comment on this post

Shutdown: The lunch-hour effect

Posted at 12:30 PM on July 5, 2011 by Bob Collins (15 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The winners and losers in the Minnesota government shutdown were on display in downtown Saint Paul today.

Winners: There was no waiting at high noon today at the restaurants and fast-food joints in the city's Town Square and plenty of tables available in the usual free-for-all in the seating area.

Losers: Restaurants and fast-food joints. Not since the disastrous Republic National Convention in 2008, have the locals seen such a drop-off in business. The manager of a coffee shop told me this morning business was about half what it usually might be.

Why the impact? The Minnesota Department of Public Safety, the Driver and Vehicle Services office, the Department of Agriculture, and the office of the attorney general are among the bigger state agencies located in downtown Saint Paul.

Comment on this post

Pawlenty on the shutdown

Posted at 11:39 AM on July 5, 2011 by Bob Collins (3 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty's presidential campaign is out with a new commercial, scrapping the speeches and glitz of previous commercials and stressing Pawlenty's role in Minnesota's 2005 shutdown.

The ad makes no mention that one of the reasons the 2005 state shutdown lasted as long as it did, was Pawlenty's insistence on a tax on cigarettes, which he called a "health impact fee."

Nor does it contain Pawlenty's quote after the shutdown ended: ""Government is going to grow. Government does important things. We just want it to grow within reason and grow at a rate that's sustainable"

Comment on this post

Lies, damn lies, and political statistics

Posted at 10:59 AM on July 5, 2011 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Apparently, we're going to hear a factoid about South Carolina from now until its presidential primary on January 28 -- that South Carolina knows how to pick a winner when it comes to Republicans. That, allegedly, is why Republicans are schmoozing up the state.

NPR's Debbie Elliott passed the nugget along today in her piece about presidential politicking in the state.

South Carolina's "first in the South" primary has a track record. The state has picked the eventual Republican nominee in every race since Ronald Reagan in 1980.

We'll spot you Reagan, South Carolina, but beyond that, how big of a deal is this fact? Not very.

Consider two realities. Incumbent presidents are rarely tested within their own party and primaries are virtually irrelevant. Aside from Reagan's victory in 1980 (Strom Thurmond backed Reagan so the election was over early), that takes 1984, 1992 (George Bush was not seriously challenged by Pat Buchanan), and 2004 (the race was uncontested). '

That takes 4 primary results off the board.

In 1988, Reagan's VP defeated Bob Dole in South Carolina. A sitting VP clearly enjoys an advantage.

In 2000, George W. Bush beat John McCain, but it took a dirty tricks campaign to do so. Before the election, a phony poll was created to call voters and ask them, "Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain...if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?"

That leaves 1996 (Bob Dole over Pat Buchanan) and 2008 (John McCain over Mike Huckabee).

So since 1980, South Carolina has selected the eventual nominee in a contest that wasn't a foregone conclusion or decided by dirty tricks twice. Big deal.

All that said, Elliott's piece on the role of The Beacon -- and the character therein -- in presidential politics was pretty fine.

Comment on this post

Shutdown: Editorial roundup

Posted at 8:32 AM on July 3, 2011 by Bob Collins (3 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

A roundup of editorials on the state shutdown:

The Pioneer Press editorial today comes out squarely on the side of GOP lawmakers:

While tax revenue will be up nearly 6 percent this year, Dayton wants spending to increase 12 percent. This kind of spending is unsustainable. The Minnesota State Demographic Center predicts a 4.1 percent annual rate of revenue growth between 2010 and 2020. Meanwhile, with very little total population growth, the 65+ population is about to skyrocket - increasing more in this decade than it has in the last 40 years combined. So what we are facing is the lethal combination of low workforce growth, low revenue growth and high growth in entitlement spending.

The governor is silent on this, the issue of our time. Silent, perhaps, because the holy grail of the left, taxing the rich, can't possibly solve the problem.

It's easy to blame one side or the other, the Worthington Daily Globe says...

It's easy to play party politics like those in St. Paul are doing, but one can't blame just

Republican lawmakers or Gov. Mark Dayton for this gridlock. Republicans, for instance, are united against a planned tax increase on the state's highest earners; Dayton, for his part, for too long seemed more worried about planning for a shutdown than calling legislators together in an attempt to avoid one.

That's pretty much how the Bemidji Pioneer sees it:

Minnesota is the only state to have its government shut down this year, even though nearly all states have severe budget problems, and some have divided governments.

In whatever manner the impasse is solved - sooner rather than later - the Democrats and Republicans have accomplished their basic partisan desires with the blame game. They have made both of their houses look bad.

In its editorial today, the Rochester Post Bulletin finds fault with both sides, too, but generally comes down on the side of the DFL:

It's time to ask ourselves, "What kind of Minnesota do we want?" We prefer to live in a great state that offers world-class public education, good roads, quality health care for everyone (including the poor, the elderly and the handicapped) and protects our natural resources.

We're convinced that the vast majority of Minnesotans are willing to pay a little bit more to guarantee a better quality of life for themselves and future generations, but the Republicans believe otherwise.

Comment on this post

Shutdown: Camp Capitol

Posted at 8:58 AM on July 2, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The most surprising aspect of Chris Lapakko's one-man protest on the lawn of the state Capitol is that it's a one-man protest. Lapakko, 28, of South St. Paul, works in the Department of Public Safety's driver and vehicle services division.

Of the 22,000 state workers thrown out of work by the government shutdown, he was the only one to pitch a tent on the Capitol lawn. Judging by the video he uploaded (Warning: Some obscenities), he didn't spend the night, but he'll be back by day.

Comment on this post

Making a better tomorrow, tomorrow

Posted at 12:18 PM on June 30, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

There was big news in Washington today when the Federal Election Commission approved agenda document 11-38, draft A as amended by 11-38B with technical and forming changes on a 5-to-1 vote.

Did you ever think you'd live long enough to see this day?

It means Stephen Colbert can form a "Super PAC."

Colbert sought a "media exemption" from campaign finance laws, allowing him to use airtime, staff and other resources from his Comedy Central show on campaign activities such as TV ads. He wouldn't have to disclose the spending.

But the FEC said the material couldn't be shown on other Comedy Central programs, because that would constitute an in-kind contribution from the Viacom Corporation, which owns the network.

Colbert floated the idea as a parody of Tim Pawlenty's PAC ad, which invoked dozens of images but said virtually nothing. He adopted the theme, "Making a better tomorrow, tomorrow."

Comment on this post

Dear Minnesota: 'You're fired'

Posted at 12:14 PM on June 30, 2011 by Bob Collins (11 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

News Cut reader Doreen Clark has penned a letter to the state of Minnesota, informing it that it is fired.

Dear "State,"

After long contemplation and personal struggle with my "Minnesota Nice," I have decided that this is not working for me - so, you are fired.

I have thought long-and-hard about the great things our state has to offer, including our beautiful parks and our state workers that continue the outstanding Minnesota work ethics tradition that we are known for. You have decided the things we take pride in are not vital. I disagree, so yes, you are fired.

I thought about my own job description and, boy are you lucky to have worked as long as you have. Consider yourself fortunate. In this economy, I am sure there are many that would take your pay, settle the budget and actually do what they were hired to do. Yes, you are fired.
What is your job description anyways, state? Did it include shunning those that looked to you for support? If so, then that is one check in your corner. If, on the other hand, it included securing a budget, which by all accounts it probably did, this is why we are having this frank discussion. Also, I have found your people skills lacking. You're fired.

At my job, I have people I am accountable to and I can't just walk away or throw a fit if I disagree. But, I am sure you know this. Do you think that good business rules don't apply to you?

As we finalize this separation agreement, I want you to know that everyone in this state IS vital. And, it hurts to hear you say that some are not. Have you ever heard the saying,"actions speak louder than words?" Your words are loud and clear and unacceptable. You are fired.
I think that it is time that you reflect and time is running out.

Play nice on the playground (if it's not closed), do the job you were hired to do and apologize to the state of Minnesota for having to listen to your childish squabbles at our expense - or yes, you are fired!

Sincerely,

Doreen Clark

Comment on this post

Shutdown 101: How to get unemployment

Posted at 11:26 AM on June 30, 2011 by Bob Collins (13 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Department of Human Services has sent its employees this memo on how to get unemployment during the shutdown:

If there is a state government disruption of services we know that thousands of state employees will be applying for unemployment benefits. At the same time, there are roughly 114,000 fellow citizens who are currently requesting unemployment benefits every week. In order to make the application process go as smoothly as possible for you and to ensure that those currently receiving benefits experience no disruption of service, we have prepared instructions for state employees who may need to apply for unemployment benefits. Those instructions can be found at the www.BeReadyMN.com site and also on the UI website at http://www.uimn.org/ui/shutdown/index.html .

Here is a brief summary of what you will find at those websites:

** UI works the same for state employees as it does for all other workers in the state. There are no special provisions.

**You should not apply for unemployment benefits until you are actually unemployed and have worked less than 32 hours in a Sunday through Saturday week - this means you should not apply for benefits until the week of July 3rd.

** Your unemployment benefits application will be effective the Sunday of the week you apply.

** There is no advantage to applying early.

** In order to manage the volume of applications, there is a schedule for applying next week based on the last digit of your social security number. The schedule can be found at http://www.uimn.org/ui/shutdown/index.html

** Our online self-service system will be available on July 4th (our staff will not be working on the 4th, however, due to the holiday.)

We encourage you to apply for unemployment benefits online. Our online self-service system is faster and easier and we expect our phone system to be very busy during the week of July 3rd.

No matter what state you live in, apply for unemployment benefits with the State of Minnesota - www.uimn.org.
If you are not working due to the shutdown, you are considered laid off for unemployment insurance purposes.

State employees who are not working due to the shutdown will not be receiving vacation pay or severance pay.

Select "direct deposit" for your payment method if you can. Direct deposit has a quicker initial set up time than the debit card option.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Comment on this post

You're not essential

Posted at 4:33 PM on June 29, 2011 by Bob Collins (3 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Losing a job and a paycheck for who-knows-how-long is certainly the toughest part about being a state employee-victim of a crisis not of your making. But finding out you're not an essential cog in the wheel of Minnesota can't be a lot of fun, either.

The Department of Human Services this afternoon let their "non-essential" employees know they're non-essential employees by telling them that if they were essential, they'd know by now.

As you know, Governor Dayton filed a petition with the court identifying critical activities that should be continued in the event of a shutdown beginning July 1. All agency operations would be discontinued except for those determined by the court to be critical activities. In the context of a possible shutdown, "critical activities" are generally those that must remain uninterrupted or conditions that would create a potential immediate threat to public health and/or safety.

We view all positions to be vitally important to the work we do and we value the work you do as a DHS employee. However, I can let you know at this time notices have been delivered to staff who are serving in critical positions. If you did not receive a notice and if a shutdown is not averted, you are not to report to work or perform any agency work on or after July 1, 2011 for the duration of the shutdown, unless you are otherwise notified that you are to return to work.

We will provide more information as it becomes available. Please keep informed through your local news resources and visit Be Ready MN (https://www.bereadymn.com/) daily for updates. Answers to questions will be posted as they become available. In addition the Employee Emergency Information Line (651-431-3023; Relay Service 1-800-627-3529) will be updated regularly.

We truly appreciate your patience and cooperation during this difficult time and look forward to this situation being resolved soon.

Comment on this post

This is how they do it

Posted at 11:47 AM on June 29, 2011 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

While much has been made of the size of Minnesota's budget shortfall -- it's one of the highest deficits as a percentage of the state's overall budget -- we are hardly alone. Forty-six states have reduced services as a result of budget woes, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Minnesota's projected 2012 budget shortfall of $3.8 billion is 20.3% of the state's general fund budget. Five states have it worse: California (27.2%), Nevada (37.4%), New Jersey (36%), Oregon (25.5%), and Texas (20.5%).

What are they doing about it? Here's a look:

California - Gov. Jerry Brown caved on his quest for a compromise of budget cuts and revenue increases last week. He needed four Republicans to agree. They wouldn't. A budget was approved today relies on forecasts that the economy will improve and California will reap $4 billion in additional revenue just because of it. According to the Los Angeles Times, a 23% cut in funding means "cash grants for the needy would fall, a program to help thousands of teen mothers get an education would be suspended and hundreds of millions of dollars would be siphoned from mental health programs." Universities are taking big cuts and raising tuition. Seventy state parks will close.

Nevada - The Republican governor reached a budget deal earlier this month that extends $620 million in temporary taxes that were to expire tomorrow. But 70 percent of the state's business will get a tax break. Room taxes at hotels will go toward education. Teacher tenure was eliminated as was seniority in deciding which teachers will be eliminated. Employees hired after the first of the year will not get retirement health insurance.

New Jersey - Lawmakers are expected to vote on a budget today that is $1 billion more than the governor wants. Democrats are relying on revenue estimates that are too rosy, according to the governor. The Democrats' budget would restore money for education, boost tax relief to the working poor and prevent steep cuts to Medicaid, according to the Newark Star Ledger.

The governor will veto the measure and Democrats do not have the Republican votes to override him. He has also promised to veto the millionaire's tax, an income-tax surcharge on residents making more than $1 million a year, which Democrats are pushing in a bill separate from the overall budget.

Like Minnesota, the two sides are risking a government shutdown on Friday. If New Jersey goes toes up, Minnesota won't be getting much national attention if/when it shuts down Friday morning.

Oregon - One of the major sticking points is the size of the state's public safety budget. Under the newly inked deal, the Register-Guard reports, "an $18 million hole in the state's $1.4 billion budget for prisons would be filled partly through a bill that would save money by capping the length of prison sentences for probation violationsand partly through debt savings on state bonds that were never sold, as well as some other piecemeal savings." Democrats and Republicans split the difference on their stances on the bill.

"It's a compromise," said Rep. Dennis Richardson, a Central Point Republican and the GOP's point man on the budget. "Neither side was going to let the other leave with exactly what they wanted. ... This allows us all to go home. It's time."

The budget raises some court fees to fund the judiciary budget.

Earlier the state cut funding to the state's seven public universities by 17 percent -- a 5 percent decrease from the governor's recommend budget.

Texas - A bill passed last night cutting $4 billion in state aid for Texas school districts, according to the Houston Chronicle. Republicans say the school cuts and others in a state budget that slashed $15 billion were necessary to avoid raising taxes. Supporters argue that school districts are bloated in administrative salaries and costs and could spend some of that money in the classroom.

The state did not raise taxes and did not touch $10 billion in reserve funds.

It appears that a bill that would have required local law enforcement to allow officers to ask anyone they detain about their citizenship status would fail. The lawmakers did pass a bill making it a crime for TSA agents to "grope" airline passengers, however.

Comment on this post

The state you were trying to reach is not in service

Posted at 4:06 PM on June 27, 2011 by Bob Collins (11 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Department of Human Services in Minnesota has sent out guidelines to their employees about what to do to prepare for a state shutdown.

We were particularly impressed with the suggested script for recording voicemail messages:

"Hello this is __________. Due to the shutdown of state government I am away from work indefinitely. I will return to work when the Legislative funding for the continued operation of the Minnesota Department of Human Services is enacted into law. For more information, please monitor news reports or see our website at www.dhs.state.mn.us."

If you're a regular News Cut reader, you know we can't pass this up.

Even if you're not a Minnesota state worker, write the voicemail message script you'd like to hear if you were calling the state.

Post it below.

Don't let me down.

Comment on this post

The serial killer's spirit?

Posted at 1:42 PM on June 27, 2011 by Bob Collins (7 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Don't politicians know how to Google?

Michele Bachmann invoked the name of John Wayne, a son of Iowa with whom she shares a spirit, she says.

How can a presidential candidate possibly go wrong identifying with John Wayne?

Answer: by getting the wrong John Wayne. The John Wayne that was from Waterloo, was John Wayne Gacy, notorious serial killer.

John Wayne the actor, born Marion Morrison, was from Winterset, Iowa, which is about 167 miles away.

Comment on this post

Silent before microphones, legislative leaders take to e-mail

Posted at 12:53 PM on June 27, 2011 by Bob Collins (17 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Legislative leaders and the governor have taken a vow of silence on the budget negotiations that may or may not be making progress toward averting a shutdown of state government later this week.

The battle for the hearts and minds is now taking place in the inbox of state employees. House Speaker Kurt Zellers and Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch sent this e-mail to state employees today:

Dear Valued State Employee:

As Speaker of the House and Majority Leader of the Senate, we want to personally let you know that we do not want a government shutdown. Our best opportunity for resolution is in the next 72 hours. This is a serious time for you, for us and for our state.

The budget that passed the Minnesota Legislature in May spent $34 billion. It represents a 12% increase over the $30 billion this same tax structure brought in for the past two years. If we include the $2.3 billion of federal stimulus dollars that supplemented our current budget during the recession, this $34 billion budget represents a 6% increase in spending. All without raising taxes.

The governor vetoed all but the agriculture budget. He originally wanted to spend $37 billion, and later revised his budget. However, he has yet to provide key details for each part of that budget.

Since the governor vetoed the Legislatures budget bills, we have made three substantive compromises. We funded K-12 education, public safety and courts at the governors requested levels; withdrew our request for tax cuts; and allocated additional resources to higher education, environment, and flood and disaster relief. All were rejected by Governor Dayton.

We also asked to be called to special session - something only the governor can do - so that we can pass bills and avoid an unfortunate, unnecessary and potentially costly shutdown. The Governor has said he will not call a special session.

We, like you, know what it is like to sit around the kitchen table, pay the bills and balance our household budget. We know that our balanced budget includes difficult decisions for state agencies. But you can be sure about one thing: Our budget keeps state agencies open on July 1 and state employees will continue getting paychecks beyond June 30.

We agree with the Pioneer Press editorial from Sunday, June 26 that characterized Governor Daytons negotiations as This is not a compromise. This is hostage taking. Governor Dayton promised as a candidate to not shut down government, and he reiterated that pledge during his State of the State Address this year.

We take him at his word, and we will work everyday to help him keep it. We remain resolved to working with Governor Dayton to complete the state budget by June 30 and to keep state government open.

Sincerely,

Speaker Kurt Zellers
Majority Leader Amy Koch

The letter counters one sent a week ago by Gov. Mark Dayton:

This weekend you received notices that, unless a budget is enacted by July 1st, state government will shut down most of its operations. Most of you would be laid off or placed on an unpaid leave of absence until government operations resume. This was an extremely difficult decision for everyone involved; however, we had no choice but to begin planning for this possibility.

As a precaution, we have identified the most critical government services, which we believe must continue even in a shutdown. Today we have submitted this list to the Ramsey County District Court, which ultimately will decide what services will continue past July 1st, if a shutdown occurs.

I consider virtually all services provided by the state to be essential, and all of them have been established by previous governors and legislatures to serve and benefit the people of Minnesota. My decisions were not based upon personal preferences or policy considerations. Rather, they were instructed by the words of the Minnesota Constitution, which states clearly: "No money shall be paid out of the treasury of this state except in pursuance of an appropriation by law." (Article XI, Sect. 1.) Thus my decisions were based entirely upon which functions of state government are so critical to protecting the lives and safety of the people of Minnesota, or which, if terminated, would cause such disorder or severe statewide economic impact, that they should be made exceptions to the Constitution's clear prohibition.

I know that I speak for my entire cabinet when I say that we greatly value you and all of our state's dedicated employees. We deeply appreciate your hard work and the high-quality services you provide to millions of Minnesotans. It is precisely those Minnesotans, those services, and your ability to deliver them, for which I am negotiating.

I will continue to do everything I possibly can to reach a compromise and a balanced budget agreement in time to avert a shutdown. I believe that you - and everyone in our state government - provide very important services to Minnesotans, and I will continue to defend you.

The last several weeks have been, and the next few weeks will be, extremely difficult for you and other state employees. I thank you. Like you, I look forward getting to resolving this crisis as soon as possible and moving ahead to our shared commitment to build a better Minnesota.

My best regards.

Sincerely,

Mark Dayton

Update 4:31 p.m. - The Minnesota Department of Health sent this memo around later today:

Speaker of the Minnesota House Kurt Zellers and Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch today sent an e-mail to state employees about budget negotiations and the possibility of a government shutdown. We have heard from a number of employees who received it, but we also know that some did not. We believe it was intended to be sent to all state employees and that they did not choose to send it to only some. For those employees who have not yet received it, they may still get it.

The email was sent to publicly available email lists, and was not coordinated through the state's central system. The Governor's Office and the MDH incident Management Team are aware of the e-mails. We know that some of employees have asked whether they should do anything in response to the message. We are not advising any particular action.

You can view the letter at http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2011/06/silent_before_microphones_legi.shtml.

Update 4:44 p.m. MAPE, the professional employees union, has sent this news release:

"Today State Representative Kurt Zellers and State Senator Amy Koch sent out what many of our members have termed an inappropriate, 'political' letter to state employees. Speaker Zellers, do you not remember that it was Representative Keith Downey, a member of your caucus, who said that when it came to the state workforce, it is important to 'starve the beast?'

Do you both not remember that throughout the recent legislative session, your members, in both houses, continually attacked hard-working, dedicated state employees by authoring and passing bills that cut state employees' jobs, wages, healthcare and pensions?

We support Governor Dayton - and do not trust what tricks your party will pull during a legislative session. Leadership is about compromise and fairness for the common good, not ideology that allows the rich to get richer. You are jeopardizing our members' livelihoods and financial well being by not compromising with Governor Dayton.

Senator Koch and Representative Zellers, make no mistake about it - our members believe to their core that the budget impasse and upcoming shutdown rest squarely on your shoulders. It is troubling that you would choose to harm the middle class rather than have the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes. Meet with the Governor and get the job done, don't waste time on insincere and insulting letters.

As an aside, we would also like to know how you got the emails of the state workforce to spam them, and why it appears that the email address it was sent from has bounced back responses from our members."

Comment on this post

Synchronized security

Posted at 12:58 PM on June 20, 2011 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Ostensibly, the story on Saturday was the "glittering" of Rep. Michele Bachmann, the latest target of gay rights activists. On Saturday, a woman tried to toss glitter at Bachmann at the RightOnline conference of conservative activists and bloggers in Minneapolis.

Upon further review, however, the most impressive part of the video is the synchronized security forces who made the woman disappear as if it was a magic show.

Comment on this post

Fiddlin' Foresters take the fall

Posted at 2:02 PM on June 13, 2011 by Bob Collins (19 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

By the end of this year, the national debt will be more than the country's GDP, but it won't be the Fiddlin' Foresters' fault.

President Barack Obama, in this video about cutting waste, targeted the Fiddling Forest Rangers. He said the government pays to operate their Web site. "I'll put their music on my iPod, but I'm not paying for their Web site," the president declared.

Within hours after the release of the video, the foresters -- and their fiddles -- were history.

Who knew cutting waste could be this easy?

But if a Web site dedicated to the Fiddling Foresters is a waste of government money, why does the government even have the Fiddling Foresters, the official "old-time string band of the US Forest Service?" From their doomed Web site (the cached version):

The band has performed at national conservation meetings, state fairs, the 2002 Winter Olympics, other international events and seminars, the National Western Stock Show, teacher workshops, elementary schools, national celebrations, open houses and various Forest Service meetings and events. They travel with complete costumes, sound system, stage lights, rear-screen projection system with PowerPoint visuals and video, props, and instruments. Depending on the occasion audience members often receive a tri-fold brochure that highlights appropriate conservation messages and the performance program.

The president Obama appointed VP Joe Biden to root out the waste, and he ordered an aggressive first step -- no more Web sites.

Starting right now, there is a freeze on all .gov URL's. This means no one can get a new one without a written waiver from the federal CIO, Vivek Kundra. Facing this constraint, agencies will focus on their current infrastructure, adding content and functionality to existing websites.

Vivek Kundra is the country's chief information officer. By the way, he's got a Web site -- cio.gov. Which do you think had more page views: Kundra's or the Fiddling Foresters?

How much does this really save? Hardly anything. The Fiddling Foresters hadn't updated their Web site in months, so no one was being paid to update it. That pretty much leaves the cost of the domain name -- a $10 per year savings. Assuming a $13.8 trillion deficit, we only need to shut down 138 billion government websites to get out of this jam.

In today's announcement, there was no mention of the blockbuster story from the Los Angeles Times today. The biggest cash airlift -- nearly two dozen C-130 planes stuffed with money -- in the history of the country has resulted in what may be the biggest theft of government money in history:

This month, he Pentagon and the Iraqi government are finally closing the books on the program that handled all those Benjamins. But despite years of audits and investigations, U.S. Defense officials still cannot say what happened to $6.6 billion in cash -- enough to run the Los Angeles Unified School District or the Chicago Public Schools for a year, among many other things.

For the first time, federal auditors are suggesting that some or all of the cash may have been stolen, not just mislaid in an accounting error. Stuart Bowen, special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, an office created by Congress, said the missing $6.6 billion may be "the largest theft of funds in national history."

How many Web sites will the government have to shut down to get its $6.6 billion back?

Comment on this post

John Edwards, distracted driver

Posted at 1:38 PM on June 3, 2011 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Former presidential candidate John Edwards cheated on his dying wife, fathered a child with a campaign staffer, and may have illegally diverted campaign funds to help keep the affair quiet.

And if that's not bad enough, he also checks his smartphone for messages while driving...

Comment on this post

On the campaign trail, another day of butchering history

Posted at 12:16 PM on June 3, 2011 by Bob Collins (23 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

As a son of the Bay State, I always enjoy it when politicians hit the Freedom Trail in search of a photo opportunity to somehow relate the beginning of the American Revolution to their campaign. They frequently don't know what they're talking about, which is ironic because the whole point of the existence of the Freedom Trail is for people to understand how the Revolution started.

Step forward, Sarah Palin...

1. Paul Revere didn't warn the British not to take away our arms. He was riding to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that the British were on their way to arrest them.

2 Paul Revere didn't ring any bells. He was on a horse. However, after he was arrested he was released by the British when bells began ringing and shots were fired.

3. He didn't ride his horse through town. He took the water route to Charlestown and then picked up the horse. The patriot leaders weren't in town, that's why he had to ride to warn them. They were hiding in outlying areas.

These factoids tend to trip up presidential candidates. A few months ago, Michele Bachmann got the state wrong when she started talking about the beginning of the Revolution...

Assuming she's following the entire Freedom Trail, her next stop should be the USS Constitution, which people probably know better as Old Ironsides. On a slow news day, we're rather hoping someone asks about the history of the ship.

Comment on this post

Get to know a state shutdown

Posted at 2:15 PM on May 24, 2011 by Bob Collins (30 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Gov. Mark Dayton today vetoed all of the budget bills the Legislature sent to him and the game of "chicken" is on in earnest. The state needs a budget by July 1, or it will have to shut down for the second time in its history.

"It's too early to worry about that," some experts say. But that's the same thing they said in April when the Minnesota Twins came out of Florida and promptly fell on their faces. Moral? It's never too early to expect the worst, especially when Republicans and Democrats are as far apart on the basic expectations of government as they currently are.

Remember, too, that last January, one House committee was already hearing about government shutdowns. It wasn't too early then, either.

What can we expect in a state government shutdown? Let 2005 be our guide.

1) Forget about saving any money.

Government shutdowns don't save the government money. On the contrary, they're pricey. For example, after 10 days, state workers are eligible for layoff pay. Many will burn vacation time to keep a paycheck coming in, but even then they don't see the cash right away. They won't actually get it until the budget is passed. But it will cost the state about $2 million a day. And the cost of preparing for a shutdown is considerable, even if the state doesn't go toes up. In 2001, it cost $2.7 million, even though the state didn't shut down.

State workers often need that second paycheck in July to make the mortgage payment. Many will not be able to make it.

2) Schedule a driver's license exam now.

Put driver's ed on the fast track. The driver's license testing stations will likely close right away. Licenses and tabs could probably still be renewed.

3) Closed rest areas

This won't be that big of a deal, although you can count on seeing lots of visuals on TV and newspapers. There are only a few dozen rest areas in Minnesota anyway and, besides, truck stops and convenience stores are all located off major highways and they have restrooms.

4) Plan your vacation somewhere else.

State Parks will close. But because the July 4th weekend is so important in Minnesota, the Legislature would likely pass a natural resources budget first. Still, you'll have to decide whether it's worth the gamble. Wisconsin is lovely at this time of the year.

5) Transportation

MnDOT (the Department of Transportation) would likely be the hardest hit. Construction projects might shut down. Potholes won't be filled. If there are hazards on a highway that couldn't be removed, the roads would be closed. Roadsides won't be mowed. The traffic cameras would be shut down. The Highway Helpers will disappear.

About three or four thousand MnDOT employees would likely be furloughed.

6) Battered women and children endangered?:

Some battered women and children shelters could close after several days. State grants which fund them wouldn't be authorized. A judge would likely determine whether some services are "essential," and would need to be funded.

7) What's essential?

In 2005, the state deemed these functions to be "essential" and, thus, funded:

• Medical care of inpatients and emergency outpatient care;
• Activities essential to ensure continued public health and safety, including safe use of
food, drugs, and hazardous materials;
• Continuance of transportation safety functions and the protection of transport property;
• Protection of lands, buildings, waterways, equipment and other property owned by the
government;
• Care of prisoners and other persons in the custody of the government;
• Law enforcement and criminal investigations;
• Emergency and disaster assistance;
• Activities that ensure the production of power and the maintenance of the power
distribution system;
• Activities essential to the preservation of the essential elements of the financial system of the government, including the borrowing and tax collection activities of the government;
• Activities necessary to maintain protection of research property.

Here are some of the appropriations the court master made during the shutdown of 2005. And here.

It's possible that the Legislature could pass a "light's on" bill in a special session, continuing funding at current levels. But that's more likely if a broader framework for an agreement on budget issues has been reached or is at hand. Passing a "light's on" bill, however, takes the pressure off reaching deals. There isn't a lot that politicians at the Capitol agree on, but "light's on" is usually one of them. They hate "light on" bills.

Comment on this post

Budget blues

Posted at 1:03 PM on May 23, 2011 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Minnesota Majority, Taxpayer's League of Minnesota and other conservative groups held a press conference on the state budget at noontime today. A few reporters showed up but it's been awhile since the groups have been able to attract much of a crowd at its Capitol mall events.

As you can see, the big "visual" was the Dayton soup truck. What attracted more attention around the Capitol today? The real thing:

Comment on this post

Roll call vote: Same-sex marriage ban amendment

Posted at 11:40 PM on May 21, 2011 by Bob Collins (31 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Comment on this post

Draw.

Posted at 2:46 PM on May 19, 2011 by Eric Ringham (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Comment on this post

Zellers on professor remark: MPR misinformed me

Posted at 10:51 AM on May 19, 2011 by Bob Collins (15 Comments)
Filed under: Media, Politics

We now know where Minnesota House Speaker Kurt Zellers got his information before making the assertion that college professors in Minnesota have been getting 20-30 percent pay increases while Minnesota families are losing 30-40 percent of their income: MPR, Zellers says.

Appearing on MPR's Midmorning program today, a caller asked Zellers about the earlier comment, which he made this week on MPR's Midday program. Up until this morning, Zellers had not responded to requests for his information source.

"It was a story that was on MPR last fall," Zellers told Kerri Miller. "MnSCU bonuses to top staffers nears $300K."

"Usually, we Republicans are the first to complain about headlines being misleading, but looking at the headline and looking at the bonuses (headline?) , the bonuses were for staffers; they weren't necessarily for professors. I guess Brian (the caller) can say I was a little close to misinformed and what I was talking about from a family's perspective was my neighbor. He has had his wages cut 40 percent," Zellers said.

His response is at the 48:56 mark.

Comment on this post

Same-sex marriage ban one step from voters

Posted at 11:43 AM on May 18, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Comment on this post

Roll call vote: Income tax increase for the wealthy

Posted at 3:58 PM on May 17, 2011 by Bob Collins (4 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Comment on this post

Where are the college professors getting big pay raises?

Posted at 1:35 PM on May 17, 2011 by Bob Collins (20 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

College professors getting big pay raises apparently are the new $100,000 waiter and waitress.

House Speaker Kurt Zellers started a bit of a brouhaha on MPR's Midday yesterday when he said, "it's also troubling when families have had a 30- or 40percent pay cut and you see a college professor get a 20- or 30-percent increase in pay." The assertion is reminiscent of gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer's invoking the specter of $100,000 waiters and waitresses in a discussion about the state's minium wage.

Professors who get 30- and 40-percent pay increases? Like who? Some college professors would like to know. We've heard from a few in the last 24 hours.

"No Minnesota State Colleges and University faculty represented by the IFO received any pay raises in the last two-year contract," Margaretta S. Handke of Mankato says. "We were aware of the state budget problems and did not ask for any."

Diane Fleury-Evans, the director of the radiologic technology program at Century College said Speaker Kurt Zellers "obviously has no idea of what he speaks of."

I am a MnSCU faculty member and never in my history of teaching have I ever seen a 20 - 30% pay increase," she said. " It has been almost four years since I have seen any pay increase, but yet the cost of living keeps on increasing. I am considering leaving the state because of the financial situation. I had hoped to retire here but I am having second thoughts.

"I work hard for my living and believe my job of teaching our younger generation to work in radiology- healthcare, is vital and essential. Someone has to provide quality care of us baby boomers. Does the speaker realize how hard it would be to attract quality faculty to teach here in Minnesota based on the current salary scale?" she said.

Would you ask the Speaker to identify the names of the MNSCU faculty members that have gotten a pay increase and specifically those that were privileged to get a 20 - 30 % increase? Did I get left out? Maybe they could give me a loan so I can live on my paycheck after my soon to be increased health insurance premium has been deducted .

I am appalled that anyone can make such a statement that is SO blatantly false and as a public servant he should have a better idea of what is/has occurring/occurred in higher education.

Speaker Zellers has not yet responded to a request for clarification of his remarks.

Comment on this post

A brief history of the constitutional amendment

Posted at 1:04 PM on May 16, 2011 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

When the same-sex marriage ban in the constitution reaches the November 2012 ballot, a majority of those voting will have to approve it for it to become law. Occasionally, people vote for people on the ballot, but don't answer the referendum questions. That's as good as a "no" vote.

How often does it happen that a constitutional amendment has failed even though more people voted "yes" vote than "no?"

The last time it happened was more than 30 years ago, when it happened four times on the same ballot. Four proposed amendments got more "yes" than "no" votes, but all four did not get the majority of the total votes cast in the election.

One would've removed the requirement that the Senate approve notaries public, another removed restrictions on the interest rate for and the amount of highway bonds, a third would've established initiative and referendum. A fourth question established a bipartisan reapportionment commission. It got almost 300,000 more "yes" than "no" votes, but fell 6,000 votes short of the majority needed.

Of the 41 constitutional amendment questions on the ballot since 1962, these are the only other ones to fail while still getting the majority of votes cast

1974: A proposal that the constitution be amended when 55% of the people voting on the issue approve it, fell about 10,000 votes short of the required number to be approved. Supporters said it would make amending the constitution easier, but ironically, it would've set a more difficult bar on this particular question.

1966: A proposed amendment would've required legislators to resign immediately upon election to any other office. It fell 80,000 votes short of the required majority.

But getting on the ballot in the first place is a huge step toward being approved. Eighty percent of constitutional amendments submitted to voters are approved.

Comment on this post

The marketplace of ideas in 2011

Posted at 12:48 PM on May 13, 2011 by Michael Olson (8 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

College campuses are frequently held up as a market place of ideas, or at least a reflection of our current state of civic discourse. What's your take on the item below?

Colleague Alex Friedrich who blogs for On Campus has a fascinating item about the flag burning attempt by Ben Haas. He's a communication studies graduate student at Louisiana State University.

Comment on this post

Church basement problem-solving

Posted at 2:40 PM on May 12, 2011 by Eric Ringham
Filed under: Politics

The advocacy group A Minnesota Without Poverty has just released a video arguing for a public-sector response to public problems. A note from AMWP Director Nancy Maeker says the video "uses humor to address the notion that charities and the faith community should be able to pick up the pieces if the state budget is solved only through cuts."

Humor works best when you don't explain it, so here goes.

And if you think hot dish pothole patch sounds outlandish, remember: They're already using sugar beets as ice melt.

The same-sex marriage roll call

Posted at 2:35 PM on May 11, 2011 by Bob Collins (15 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Comment on this post

The same-sex marriage debate in 8 minutes

Posted at 1:38 PM on May 11, 2011 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

For nearly four hours, the Minnesota Legislature debated the bill that would add a constitutional amendment question to the 2012 ballot that would ban same-sex marriage.

Here's a telescoped version of the debate. You won't hear many bill supporters speak. For the most part, they've left defense of the bill (which passed) up to Sen. Warren Limmer.

Comment on this post

Under Vikings stadium plan, Saint Paul becomes most expensive city to shop

Posted at 2:43 PM on May 10, 2011 by Bob Collins (7 Comments)
Filed under: Politics, Sports

Comment on this post

Voter ID roll call

Posted at 11:57 AM on May 6, 2011 by Bob Collins (3 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Comment on this post

The Bin Laden poll

Posted at 2:33 PM on May 3, 2011 by Bob Collins (11 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The chances are if you take away any of those involved in tracking down and killing Osama bin Laden, he'd still be alive right now. That much is an inescapable conclusion of most any of the stories that have revealed the background of last weekend's raid on Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan.

But Americans don't pay a lot of attention to the details when the pollsters call. When the Gallup organization called 645 of them yesterday, the chances are pretty good that few of them had yet watched John Brennan's news conference yesterday that offered details on how the operation was carried out.

It's one reason why the stories about who the American public think deserves the credit, deserves to be taken with a grain of salt.

When 12 percent of the people say the president, who had the option of not approving the raid, deserved no credit for bringing Bin Laden down, let's just say that's a good indication that polls don't reveal a scholarly approach to reality. Similarly when 25 percent give no credit to President George Bush, it reveals the truth about polling: Most every question might as well be "Who do you like? Don't worry about why."

Eleven percent of those surveyed didn't think the most important part of killing Bin Laden was actually killing him. Otherwise, they would've said the military deserved the most credit.

The truth is: We don't have enough information to answer these sorts of questions with any degree of accuracy. A good followup poll question to almost any poll like this would be "how do you know?"

My money is on "I don't."

Meanwhile, a Washington Post poll, taken on Monday, shows a 10% jump in the number of people who think the U.S. is headed in the right direction, compared to a similar poll in March. Really? If that's true, then how come "Bin Laden is still alive" wasn't one of the reasons in previous polls about why people have thought the country is heading in the wrong direction?

In that poll, by the way, 32% of those surveyed said they had heard little or nothing at all about the killing of Bin Laden.

Comment on this post

Legislators target majority rule on tax increases

Posted at 2:07 PM on April 28, 2011 by Bob Collins (8 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The 2012 ballot is certainly going to be a long one if all of the proposed constitutional amendment questions are approved by this year's Legislature.

Today, Republicans in the House filed another one. This one proposes an amendment requiring a three-fifths vote to enact a law imposing or increasing certain taxes.

The bill would require a "super majority" for tax increases, not unlike the 60 votes needed in the U.S. Senate to end a filibuster and get major legislation through.

Why wait until next November?

The legislature of New Hampshire is considering the same legislation. So is Wisconsin.

Sixteen states require a supermajority vote to increase some or all taxes. Seven require a two-thirds vote, six a three-fifths vote and two a three-fourths vote.

Comment on this post

The voter ID question

Posted at 1:13 PM on April 28, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Minnesota Senate has passed a bill requiring all Minnesotans to present a photo ID in order to vote.

And a bill was officially introduced in the Minnesota House this week that would add a constitutional question to the ballot asking if people should be required to show a photo ID when voting. The question reads:

Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to require that all voters present an approved form of photographic identification prior to voting; all voters be subject to identical eligibility verification standards regardless of the time of their registration; and the state provide at no charge an approved photographic identification to eligible voters?

Republicans claim the bill will reduce the chance of voter fraud, even though there doesn't appear to be significant incidents of voter fraud in Minnesota. Democrats claim the bill is intended to dampen turnout among the party's usual constituencies, and there's at least some evidence to show that's not a significant problem, either.

The national movement for voter ID gained its momentum from Indiana once the U.S. Supreme Court ruled its 2005 law constitutional -- three years ago today, coincidentally.

A 2007 study from Jeffrey Milyo at the University of Missouri found no significant change in voter turnout after it was enacted:

The findings that emerge from my analysis are that photo ID is associated with: i) an overall county-level turnout increase of almost two percentage points, ii) an insignificant increase in relative turnout for counties with a greater percentage of minority and poor population, iii) no consistent or significant impact on relative turnout in counties with a greater percentage of less educated or elderly voters, and iv) a significant relative increase in turnout for counties with a higher percentage of Democrat voters.

The study ran counter to a Rutgers University study of the 2004 election, suggesting voter ID laws suppressed turnout among minority and low-income voters.

In the absence of firm evidence of traditional arguments, much of the debate about voter ID has shifted instead to the cost of implementing the law and providing photo ID to voters who don't have one already.

Comment on this post

A day in democracy

Posted at 2:27 PM on April 27, 2011 by Bob Collins (6 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

Florida, not surprisingly, is going to be ground zero in the debate over the future of Medicare.

Last night, in separate town hall-style forums, Republican congressmen faced constituents.

These videos from the Orlando Ft. Lauderdale Sun Sentinel capture the confrontations, not so much between an elected official and his constituents, but between constituents.

If you're good at lip reading, check out the reaction of the woman sitting behind the woman being escorted out of Rep. Dan Webster's forum.

The scene wasn't much different at the forum last night with Rep. Allen West...

Comment on this post

'The quaint artifact of name recognition'

Posted at 1:16 PM on April 27, 2011 by Bob Collins (8 Comments)
Filed under: Politics

The Atlantic's (and, occasionally, NPR's) James Fallows piles on the political media with this takedown of the coverage of Donald Trump:

Speaking of carnival barkers: Every member of the political press knows that the chance of Donald Trump becoming the 45th President of the United States is zero. I say that the chance of Sarah Palin becoming president is extremely low but greater than zero. I will take any bet at any odds against Trump becoming president, for reasons I'll boil down to this: the same circumstances that would make Obama so vulnerable that a Trump could beat him (economic, political, military, or social chaos of any kind you want to imagine), would simultaneously motivate the Republican party to choose a "real" candidate with the best chance of winning the election and running the government. That is, if the Republicans think they have a serious chance to win, they're not going to blow that chance with Trump.

My real point is: knowing for sure that Trump's "lead" in the GOP polls now is a quaint artifact of name recognition, and knowing that there is no chance that his "colorful" background and prima donna manner could stand the long grueling, humiliating ordeal of the primaries and the caucuses and the endless interviews, how long will the press keep acting as the megaphone for this carnival barker? Why aren't they jumping all over him now, for the patent idiocy of his "birther" claim, rather than acting as if somehow he has scored a point by making Obama react? In reality, he'll be on the stage with the press' megaphone until people get bored with him -- which gradually but undeniably has happened to Palin.

This isn't the first time we've seen infatuation with a candidate. Two words: Ross Perot. Two more: Jesse Ventura. Celebrity candidates fill the vacuum of an election season that starts too soon.

In many ways, politicians have nobody but themselves to blame for the coverage of people they privately mock. As I've mentioned many times previously over the years, Jesse Ventura raced to the top the day he was allowed to participate in a debate with Skip Humphrey and Norm Coleman in Brainerd in October 1998 (Listen in RealAudio). They spoke "politician." Ventura didn't.

He also didn't fade by the time election day came along. And shortly after his election, local media -- including MPR -- started doing something they'd rarely done before: accompanied the state's governor on trade missions. Trust me. It wasn't to cover the significant commercial issues between Minnesota and Japan, or China, or Mexico, or Cuba. It was because there was always a pretty fair chance Jesse Ventura would say something outrageous, and nobody wanted to miss it.

That's just the way things work in political coverage and when President Obama complained about the situation today, it wasn't the first time he figured it out, either.

Ross Perot knew this, too, in the race for president almost 20 years ago. Months before the election, Perot was drawing a respectable 21 percent in the polls, and getting a fair amount of coverage. It peaked in the summer at about 39 percent. He was entertaining and could be counted on for a great sound clip.

Eventually, stories came out about Perot being a control freak, and his campaign collapsed when he alleged the George H.W. Bush campaign was out to sabotage his daughter's wedding.

It's a vicious cycle. "Celebrity candidates," knowing they can't win, have the luxury of saying outrageous things, get coverage for saying outrageous things, raise their profile because of the coverage, show up in polls, and then get more coverage because they show up in the polls.

When does the cycle end? When news organizations get bored with the story line and turn on the celebrity whose political swagger they helped create. Ventura's genius -- if there was any -- was jumping into the campaign so late, he didn't give the media time to get over its infatuation with him.

Comment on this post

Analyzing the same-sex marriage ban vote

Posted at 3:19 PM on April 26, 2011 by Bob Collins (10 Comments)
Filed under: Politics