Polinaut: June 15, 2006 Archive

Why MSM can't win

Posted at 8:03 AM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)

Michael Barone, goes off on MSM, for an article in the Washington Post over the weekend called "How the Democrats Can Win."

The Washington Post Outlook section last Sunday had a feature on "How the Democrats Can Win." It included recommendations from various Democratic strategists and thinkers, and from some Republicans and others as well. Nothing wrong with it at all. But here's my question: Do you remember whether the Post or another MainStreamMedia organ has ever run a piece on "How the Republicans Can Win"? I certainly don't remember any from the 1994 cycle, when such an article would have turned out to be particularly apt. I have vague recollections of sets of articles—How Democrats Can Win; How Republicans Can Win. But does anyone remember a piece focusing on Republicans alone, as the Post here focused on Democrats alone?

It goes where so many have gone before. MSM wants Democrats to win so that's why it prints columns favorable to Democrats. Maybe. Maybe not. But, just for the record, Michael Barone is a member of MSM. I kind of want to hear the story about the column he wrote for U.S. News and World Report or the Economist called "How the Republicans Can Win" that they refused to print.

(Updated for needed clarification) Republicans -- or at least conservatives -- have access to the newspapers. They're just choosing to write about other things. Presumably, there is absolutely nothing to stop Kathryn Kersten, for example, from writing an article about what the Republicans have to do to win. Similarly, the same is true for Michael Barone. These folks HAVE the pulpit; they just have a different sermon prepared. (End update)

But his complaint here isn't that MSM hasn't run articles that looked at how Republicans can win ; he admits above that, indeed, it has. His complaint here is that this particular article only looked at the Democrats. And then uses innuendo here to challenge readers to find out when's the last time MSM did a story on Republicans alone, while not providing any data (which may or may not exist) that suggests that MSM (apparently other than the Post) regularly looks at Democratic prospects alone.

Does he not have Google? (Or any other search engine?) Fact is: he asked the question to make a point so he wouldn't have to do the research to ruin a good rant.

And I'm starting to get confused when bloggers use terms like MSM. Does it now just mean the Washington Post and New York Times and the biggest newspaper in the blogger's hometown? Or does it just mean places where facts still matter?

Listening to some Republicans talk about MSM is like listening to some Democrats talk about Republicans. I usually just grab some Kleenex and get back to work.

Comment on this post

Correction

Posted at 1:11 PM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)

I was premature in my posting yesterday about the IP convention. A few of us were unaware of the "transient" nature of the event depending on the weather. We have to have phone lines installed at these venues, with hard locations. In this case, there were multiple locations where the podium could be located and having the phone company install multiple (not to mention expensive) lines at multiple locations is impractical and too expensive.

So live coverage on the radio and an Internet podium stream has been cancelled. The new plan, according to producer Sara Meyer.

We will plan to RECORD the speeches and produce a one-hour special to air on MIDDAY Monday, June 26th. Laura McCallum is the assigned reporter. Mike Mulcahy and Curtis Gilbert will plan to attend as well. Mike Mulcahy is hosting MIDDAY on Monday…

One hour will be the traditional "post-convention MIDDAY call-in with the endorsed candidate" for governor, and the other hour will be the highlights of the IP convention, with analysis from commentators.

Comment on this post

An open invitation to any congressman in office, anywhere in the U.S.

Posted at 1:42 PM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins (2 Comments)

Please call me. 651-290-1414. We seem to be having a hard time getting a sitting congressman who voted for the pay raise to call us back.

Not sure if they're just too darned busy or don't want to talk about their vote.

Haven't seen a press release by the way, from a single challenger to a sitting Minnesota congressman who voted for the pay raise. I'm no political scientist, but isn't that a two-inch putt? Heck, if you were playing golf with the congressman in question, he'd just say "pick it up."

Update 2:33 p.m. We have lift-off from the Walz campaign.

MINNESOTA'S BIG SPENDER: GUTKNECHT SPENDS TAXPAYER DOLLARS ON HIMSELF

Last week Gutknecht ranked fist among Minnesota's Representatives in accepting free travel. Despite vacationing for free, Gutknecht voted this week to raise his own pay.
US Rep. Gil Gutknecht voted Tuesday to give himself and his colleagues a $3,300 pay raise. The raise passed in spite of the fact that this Congress has recently received its lowest job performance ratings ever from the American public and will likely beat the record for fewest days in session set by the "Do-Nothing Congress" of 1948. The raise will increase Gutknecht's salary to $168,500 annually. Since 2000, Gutknecht has voted to allow pay increases for himself totaling $23,230.

Gutknecht's pay increases are more than twice the $10,712 salary that a full-time minimum wage worker will earn this year. The federal minimum wage has not been increased since September 1997. Estimates suggest that nearly 87,000 Minnesotans would benefit from a minimum wage increase. According to the US Census Bureau the median income for a family of four in Minnesota's 1st Congressional District is $40,941.

Gutknecht acknowledged to the Wall Street Journal in March that there is a problem with wages. "Mr. Gutknecht asks: 'Why is there still economic angst in the United States? The answer is the average working American hasn't had a real pay raise.'"

DFL congressional candidate Tim Walz said, "I can tell my opponent why the average American worker hasn't seen a raise. It is because he hasn't pushed to increase the minimum wage. It is because under his watch health insurance costs have skyrocketed and American workers are losing economic ground as those rates erode their paychecks."

The working poor are not the only ones receiving less compensation while Gutknecht raises his own wage. In 2003, Gutknecht voted against an amendment that would provide service members a salary bonus in recognition of their service in Iraq and Afghanistan. The amendment would have provided funding to grant a $1,500 bonus to every American service member serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, including National Guard and reserve forces.

An American service member who has served in the armed forces for more than three years and has attained the enlisted rank of E-4 will earn $22,111 this year, which is about $1,000 less than Gutknecht has awarded himself in pay raises since 2000.

Walz, a retired Command Sgt. Major who served in Operation Enduring Freedom said, "I am disappointed to learn that my opponent gave himself a raise but would not give a one-time bonus to my brothers in arms who saw combat overseas. I've spent the last 17 months listening to the people of this district and I can safely say that my opponent's priorities are not shared by his constituents."

Since the attacks of September 11th, 2001, more than 11,000 members of the Minnesota National Guard have seen active federal duty, including operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Comment on this post

Huthinson on Hutchinson

Posted at 1:50 PM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins

IP gubernatorial candidate Peter Hutchinson was on Midday today.

Listen here.

Miller was right

Posted at 1:56 PM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins

Peter Hutchinson chooses Maureen Reed. She's (Kerri Miller) pretty good at this politics stuff.

It don't come easy

Posted at 4:57 PM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins

Boy, they sure don't make it easy to find the congressional financial disclosure forms online. What would be great is if the folks that ran the Minnesota Senate and Minnesota House Web sites were put in charge of the U.S. House and U.S. Senate sites, which are hopelessly irrelevant and designed to be impossible for anybody to find anything. But, then again, maybe they really don't want us to find stuff.

Political Moneyline, however, has scanned all of the forms in PDF and
is making them available and here are the direct links.

The server there has really been struggling today (oh, you mean people really want this information?) so it might take a bit.

HOUSE

Gil Gutknecht

Mark Kennedy (there's a second one, I'm not sure why)

John Kline

Betty McCollum

Jim Oberstar

Collin Peterson

James Ramstad

Martin Sabo

SENATE

Norm Coleman

Mark Dayton

Speaking of money, I'm doing a Policy and a Pint appearance next month on the subject of campaigns and money. It's not my favorite topic -- there's nothing illegal about campaign contributions and you can only prove anecodtal correlation between actions and contributions.

Specifically, the question is whether there's a correlation between money and getting elected. The easy answer is "yes," but I'm reminded of my favorite line from the movie "The American President," uttered by Michael J. Fox giving a tongue-lashing to the prez. "In the absence of real leadership, the American people will listen to the first person to the microphone."

The things you can do with a spreadsheet

Posted at 5:50 PM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins

MPR business editor Bill Catlin is a whiz with a spreadsheet. Spurred on , I suppose, by my newsroom mutterings on the validity of the pay raise Congress is giving itself as a legit news story, he figured out just how much protection Congress has been giving itself against inflation, and how that stacks up with average Americans.

The numbers he has are through 2004, since the data for household income presently available goes through 2004; so let's just assume that the folks in Washington have taken care of themselves just fine for the last two years as well.

Bill figured out that since Congress started rewarding itself with these automatic increases, effective with January 2000, adjusted for inflation, Congressional salaries outpace inflation by 2 percent.

Meanwhile, in the working world, adjusted for inflation, the median income of Americans has dropped 3.6 percent. And the average income has dropped 3.4 percent.

So Congress has padded the difference between itself and the people it represents during that time by almost 6 percent.

Still waiting for any Minnesota congressman to explain it. Anyone?

Oberstar on pay raises

Posted at 8:39 PM on June 15, 2006 by Bob Collins (5 Comments)

The All Things Considered crew tells me that one of the four Minnesota congressmen who voted himself a pay raise will talk about it on All Things Considered on Friday. Rep. Jim Oberstar will do the honors. They sent me an email asking me if I have any specific questions to ask. Well, yes. But I wonder if you have some? If so, post 'em in the comments section.

Comment on this post