Dribs and drabs

Posted at 4:36 PM on May 9, 2006 by Bob Collins (16 Comments)

The you've-got-to-pay-for-it-now Rasmussen poll this month on the Senate race and governor's race is coming out in dribs and drabs.

On the governor's race, it looks like someone over at the DFL dusted off the credit card, because they have issued a release that claims to have the Rasmussen numbers. (I'm not on the DFL mailing list so thanks to Tom Scheck for passing this along).

From the poll:

Hatch over Pawlenty 49% to 39%
Lourey over Pawlenty 43% to 40%
Kelley over Pawlenty 43% to 38%

"Some other candidate" registers between 6 and 8%.

The DFL doesn't mention the Senate race. For good reason.

Over at Kennedy vs. the Machine, they're quoting something called G2 (no idea, I don't know the secret handshake), saying Klobuchar is at 45% with Kennedy at 43%. I presume that's within the margin of error.

By the way, back to the governor's race for a moment. Think Becky Lourey's "no" votes vs. Steve Kelley's "yes" votes in today's stadium votes in the Senate further define their campaigns? I sure do.

Comments (16)

G2 = intelligence. Sorry.

Posted by Gary M. Miller | May 9, 2006 5:12 PM

I'm curious as to your reasoning in that last paragraph, Bob. Neither candidate has made their role or lack thereof in the stadium debate a vanguard issue in the campaign...thoughts?

Posted by MN Campaign Report | May 9, 2006 5:41 PM

That may have sounded more hostile than it was intended to do....but my inquiry is merely meant to get a sense of your thinking about the stadium issue.

Posted by MN Campaign Report | May 9, 2006 8:37 PM

My thinking is that the issue WILL become a campaign issue, especially if one ignores the endorsement. It's sitting there like a fat old pitch waiting for someone to give it a whack and it's difficult for me to believe that the populace, which was so up in arms about stadiums a few years ago, isn't capable of getting worked up about them again.

Posted by Bob Collins | May 10, 2006 8:30 AM

The stadium vote sealed my choice for Governor: Senator Steve Kelley.

MRP has completely mischaracterized the Kelley bill. Nowhere in its news coverage (on air or online that I can find) is there any mention of the fact that the bill is really a public transportation finance bill.

More than ten times as much money is spent on public transportation than stadiums in the Kelley bill. Yet MPR doesn't say a word about what the bill does for public transportation.

It's shoddy reporting at best and deceptive at worst.

With this vote, Senator Kelley demonstrates that he's more interested in getting things done than political pandering. He's willing to compromise, take bold action and cut deals for the greater good of the state, even at risk to his own political career.

Posted by David Greene | May 10, 2006 8:31 AM

If it's really a transportation bill, why didn't Sen. Kelley propose a separate bill? You know, a transportation bill?

And, by the way, I noted here on Polinaut more than a week ago the Kelley transportation aspect of the bill.

Kelley, by the way, said earlier this year that his priorities for the stadium were behind health care and education. He didn't mention transportation. Can you tell me what the Senate has done on health care and education this session, please?

Posted by Bob Collins | May 10, 2006 9:39 AM

I haven't spoken directly to Senator Kelley about this latest directional shift, but I think the transit issue is closely related to the stadium issue, if for no other reason than if you build a new stadium, you need a way for people to get there. Parking around the Metrodome is no happy time, and Bob - you know better than most, coming from Boston, that being able to take the train to the game is an amazing boon to a crowded city. If the Legislature was committed to getting SOMETHING done on stadiums, I think it makes good sense to attach shared priorities to that bill.

As for his other priorities, as I understand it, those are usually taken care of in the off-election year sessions, no? Last session there was a huge fight over funding increases for public education, and Senator Kelley was in the middle of the fray right to the bitter end of the special session. That they're not getting the focus in this session doesn't make them any less a personal priority for him, I think.

Posted by MN Campaign Report | May 10, 2006 11:01 AM

I haven't kept up on the health care and education issues as my organizing focus is around public transportation.

However, your original post did not mention health care and education. It was about stadiums.

I merely pointed out that the "stadium bill" does a heck of a lot more than fund stadiums. The stadiums are in fact a fractional part of the bill, budget-wise.

Why not propose a separate bill? Because the issue on the move was the stadiums. Someone else could just as well have made it an education/stadium bill or health care/stadium bill. But no one did. Kelley took the lead and therefore took the responsibility to define what would be in his bill.

There's also the small detail that the first committee deadline had passed and so it was not possible to introduce a new transportation bill at the time the stadiums came up.

The major transportation issue up until the stadiums came forward was defending the proposed MVST constitutional amendment from attacks that would have reduced the portion of MVST going to public transportation. Believe me, we had our hands full on that one almost the entire session. Introducing a metro sales tax to fund public transportation was not politically viable at the time.

Kelley has been very, very good on the public transportation issue so this isn't a left-field thing for him. Stadiums directly impact land use and transportation so the two are more related than, say, stadiums and education.

The Twins stadium quite literally sits next to the convergence point of at least five major current and future public transportation corridors (Hiawatha, Central, Northstar, Bottineau and Southwest). Not to mention the Cedar Lake bikeway and the many bus routes that serve the area. Lots of housing will be going into the same area. It makes loads and loads of sense to fund transportation infratructure that will be needed to make these projects thrive.

Personally, I think the Vikings project stinks. We should not be building sprawling complexes out in the suburbs which only serve to increase our dependence on single-occupancy vehicles. However, with public transportation funding tied in, we just might, possibly, with some creative thinking, manage to realize that we could build a rail line or two right to the doorsteps of Northern Lights.

When we develop projects no one blinks an eye when the developer asks for roads to serve the project. It's about time we make the same demands for public transportation access to large projects. We need funding to do that, which is why it makes sense to do transit funding along with stadiums.

Posted by David Greene | May 10, 2006 11:02 AM

The compromise that Mr. Greene brings up is also worth another mention - there was a groundswell of opposition to referendum-less stadium funding, so Kelley compromised, and proposed to pay off the state's investment sooner, at lower long-term cost to the taxpayers, and to put it before them for a vote.

Posted by MN Campaign Report | May 10, 2006 11:03 AM

IMO the referendum requirement is a stain on the bill.

Governing by referendum is a very bad idea. If we start down that path we're going to have all sorts of problems in the future. The state law that puts the requirement on local sales taxes should be repealed.

I'd say the same if the bill were something I didn't support. We don't have referendums on statewide taxes, so why single out local units of government? Why make schools and libraries go through the cost and energy of a referendum battle when we don't do the same for bonding projects and state property or income taxes?

We're going to see an Initiative & Referendum push from the right-wing idealogues soon, if not '07 then certainly in '08 leading up to the election. We only need look at places like California to see what such poor public policy does.

Better we not add fuel to that fire.

Posted by David Greene | May 10, 2006 11:51 AM

Hey, DG, I agree with you. We elect legislators to legislate, and that includes levying taxes for big projects like this. But I think it's a compromise that's worth making, especially with these transportation funding measures included - it means voters have more to consider in this referendum than just the stadium. Transit improvements are a good thing, and hopefully voters will see that.

Posted by MN Campaign Report | May 10, 2006 12:47 PM

The question about priorities wasn't mine. It was Sen. Kelley's. Sen. Kelley's words were -- in effect -- the priority is health care and education before stadiums.

What I'm asking is what happened to those priorities? I didn't set them. He did.

And the fact the health care portion of a spending bill was removed from debate yesteday (Tuesday), makes me ask even more.

How and why did stadiums -- and/or the means to get to a ballgame -- become a bigger priority than health care and education.

I'm not saying they should be or shouldn't be. I'm just asking why he changed his priorities.

Posted by Bob Collins | May 10, 2006 1:24 PM

By the way, call it a stadium bill. Call it a transportation bill. It's dead. It has no chance of becoming law or ever even getting to the governor's desk. I'm willing to take bets on this.

Posted by Bob Collins | May 10, 2006 1:28 PM

Easy Bob, this is not what you think.
These two are very strong Kelley supporters from the beginning. Steve Kelley can do no wrong in their eyes. MNCR is a past employee of the campaign.

So, you see, this is the campaign working your blog. A transportation bill? The Pohlads and others are not toasting success tonight because there will be more trains in town. The guy who's pockets they've filled more than any other- STEVE KELLEY- has sponsored and got a STADIUM bill through.

Save the tears about Steve risking his political career. He did not give up his state senate seat, and his governors run is the fourth in a line of offices he's run for. He'll be fine and back to carrying the water for the stadiums, cable industry and construction lobby before you know it.

Transportation bill?

Posted by Jay | May 10, 2006 8:16 PM

Yes, I know these are campaigners. But, again, *I'm* not saying anyone is right, or wrong. I'm just asking a reconciliation of words to actions. IF a stadium was said to be a lesser priority than education or health care, then why is a stadium getting action on the same day that the Senate essentially kills (or at least delays) action on a health and human services bill that includes many of Gov. Pawlenty's initiatives for mental health care.

Yes, I realize they were afraid the Republicans would add abortion language, but that's irrelevant. The question remains: WHY did a stadium (or transportation funding for that matter) leapfrog over education and health care?

The priorities obviously changed. I can see that. I just would like to know why?

Posted by Bob Collins | May 10, 2006 9:36 PM

Does anyone have an opinion on what would motivate the three announced candidates to challenge the endorsed candidate for DFL 5th? IMO it seems that the "park guy" does not have a strong enough base. Ostrow is a lightweight and not the brightest bulb in the barrel and Reichgott Junge has a very poor understanding of her "Q" rating with the public. Meanwhile, it seems Erlander assumed he was going to a coronation, not a district nominating/endorsement meeting.

I suppose it is a lifelong appointment given the make-up of the district unless the victor does or says something incredibly stupid. I credit the delegates with picking the best of the candidates. It is a chance for the lefties who never miss a chance to preach "DIVERSITY NOW" to put their $$$ and votes where their mouths now are. It should be interesting to watch, but only from afar.

Posted by Scott Simon | May 11, 2006 3:16 AM

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories