Category Archives: Political messaging

Bachmann Accuser Says He Prays Daily for Bachmann

Posted on by

Bachmannistan__Behind_The_Lines_eBook__Peter_Waldron__John_Gilmore__Kindle_StorePeter Waldron, the evangelical Christian minister and former adviser to Minnesota U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann in her 2012 presidential bid, has accused the Bachmann campaign of a series of illegal and unethical acts.  Waldron’s charges have been made in discussions with federal investigators and in Waldron’s recently released digital book, Bachmannistan:  Behind the Lines.

In a response published in the Star Tribune this morning, the Bachmann campaign gave the evangelical minister some old fashioned fire and brimstone:

“This former staffer with an ax to grind has been peddling these same reckless falsehoods, half-truths, and innuendos for well over a year in his attempt to maliciously smear Congresswoman Bachmann’s name,” finance chairman James Pollack said in a statement released by the campaign. “Doing this to someone of her immense character is despicable. Whether his motivation is an attempt to selfishly get 15 minutes of fame or reap an economic benefit on this e-book, it is unconscionable.”

jesus_turn_the_other_cheekDespite the Bachmann campaign’s blistering attack, Waldron apparently is a turn the other cheek kind of guy.  He told Wry Wing Politics in an email this morning that he prays every day for Bachmann and her husband Marcus.

“Of course, I pray for Michele and Marcus daily.  They are my brother and sister in Christ, their health, family, and future are the areas about which I pray.  God is abounding towards them at all times to love, care, and provide for them.”

On Pollock, Waldron says:

“With regard to Mr. Pollack’s effort to discredit me or our book is to simply say that I forgive him. There is one, Jesus Christ, who has forgiven me of my sins. I must forgive Jim Pollack with the same love that our Lord showed me.”

As for the the Bachmann team’s accusations that Waldron was motivated by financial gain, Waldron pointed out to Wry Wing Politics that a portion of the proceeds from the book will be donated to a church.

“I am a lifelong tither.  The work of the local church is critical to the Lord’s work in the community and nation.”

The Merriam Webster Dictionary says the definition of the verb tithe is “to pay or give a tenth part of especially for the support of the church.” That leaves 90% of the proceeds for other uses.  Still, at a relatively modest list price of $2.99 on Kindle, it’s unlikely that Waldron will achieve Stephen King-like financial status anytime soon.

Despite the firestorm Waldron encountered during his last foray into politics, the minister told Wry Wing Politics that he remains interested in working on more presidential and congressional campaigns:

“Yes, I will work for another presidential candidate, the Bachmann for President campaign was an anomaly in the context of my previous experience on campaigns for the House, Senate, and OPUS.”

Bachmannistan is available to Kindle users on amazon.com.

The Bachmann Wannabes: Conservative in the Abstract, But Slippery with Specifics

Posted on by

All four candidates running to succeed U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann in Minnesota’s 6th Congressional District are running on their intent to reverse budget deficits allegedly piled up during the Obama era.  As Minnesota Public Radio’s (MPR) Brett Neely reports:

“So far, there’s little in the way of policy differences that separates the four candidates.  They’re all sticking with the national GOP’s message about what ails Washington.

GOP candidate Rhonda Sivarajah:  “The debt.”

GOP candidate Phil Krinkie:  “Out of control spending.”

GOP candidate Tom Emmer:  “Bureaucrats.”

GOP candidate John Pederson:  “The deficit.”

The same can be said of the Republicans challenging Senator Al Franken, Governor Mark Dayton, and every other DFL incumbent.  This should come as no surprise.  “The national GOP message” is based on public opinion research, and polls show that an overwhelming number of Americans are concerned about the deficit.  For instance, about 90 percent of Americans surveyed in a Bloomberg poll believed that the deficit is getting worse (62 percent) or not improving (28 percent), with only 6 percent saying that the deficit is decreasing.

In other words, the Republican message is selling with Americans.  This bodes well for them in the 2014 mid-term elections.

 The Myth of “Skyrocketing Deficits”

It’s worth noting that 90 percent of Americans are wrong about the state of the deficit.  In an article titled “The Best Kept Secret In American Politics-Federal Budget Deficits Are Actually Shrinking!,” Forbes magazine notes:

Over the first four years of the Obama presidency, the deficit shrunk by a total of $300 billion dollars.  The improvement in the deficit as measured against GDP is the direct result of the deficit falling to $845 billion for fiscal year 2013—a $300 billion improvement over the previous year. And the positive trend is projected to continue though the next fiscal year where the the annual budgetary deficit will fall again to $430 billion.

More recently, the deficit outlook has further stabilized. As CNN Money reported in May 2013:

By 2015, the deficit will fall to its lowest point of the next decade – 2.1% of GDP. And it will remain below 3% until 2019, at which point it will start to increase again. Deficits below 3% are considered sustainable because it means budget shortfalls are not growing faster than the economy.

Still, perception is reality in politics, so conservatives can be expected to milk this inaccurate “the deficit is skyrocketing” myth for all it is worth.

Courting “Progressative” Voters With Generalities

Will_reporters_press_deficit_chicken_hawks_for_specific_cuts_At the same time, don’t look for conservative candidates to provide a detailed list of spending cuts they would make to reduce the deficit and debt more rapidly.  Again, they read polls, so they know that Americans overwhelmingly oppose cutting the largest and fastest growing government programs.  For instance, a Washington Post poll finds that 77% oppose “reducing Medicare benefits,”  82% oppose “reducing Social Security benefits,”  and 51% oppose “reducing military spending.”  Other polls show that opposition to cutting Medicare and Social Security is even more vehement among Americans over 50 years old, who are disproportionately likely to vote, particularly in non-presidential election years such as 2014.

Pew_Research_Poll__May_2013Beyond those enormous spending programs, a Pew poll also finds that a plurality of Americans believes that the funding levels for all 19 major government spending categories they tested should be either increased or maintained.  Though conservatives have spent decades calling for cuts in “government spending,” Americans are steadfastly rejecting specific cuts in all parts of the federal budget.

Therefore, the dilemma for contemporary politicians is this:   Americans support the abstract notion of “cutting government spending,” which sometimes make us appear to be a conservative nation.  At the same time, Americans oppose cutting any of the component parts of “government spending,” which makes us look like a remarkably progressive nation.  Fiscally speaking, Americans are “progressatives,” conservative with our generalized rhetoric, but progressive with our program-by-program choices.

If the past is predictive of the future, most political reporters won’t press conservative candidates for a specific list of spending cuts to support their bluster.  Instead, reporters will allow conservative candidates to rail in a generalized way about “cutting spending,” and in a false way about “skyrocketing deficits.”  And as long as that rhetorical free ride is allowed to continue, the polls show that conservatives’ “cut government spending” mantra is a winning message.

 -Loveland

Note:  This post also was chosen for re-publication in Minnpost and as one of Politics in Minnesota’s Best of the Blogs.

Picture A New Kind of Minnesota Policy Wonk

Posted on by

Texty_policy_report-2Minnesota is blessed with talented, thought-provoking policy researchers and analysts.  Some of my favorites are at Minnesota 2020, Minnesota Growth and Justice, Minnesota Citizens for Tax Justice, Minnesota Management and Budget, Minnesota Revenue and Minnesota State Demographic Center, among many others.

But too few Minnesotans know about their best work.   It breaks my wonky little heart that so much of their analysis gets consumed by dust mites instead of citizens and policymakers.

So, I have advice for them:  Tithe to a graphic designer.

I’m not kidding.  Policy analysts who want to remain relevant in a fast changing world need to set aside something like 10% of their research and communications budget to pay a talented graphic designer to crystallize their research findings in a series of visually rich snapshots, sometimes called infographics.

Why would a serious research organization invest in such “fluff?”  So more people become informed by their research and analysis.

Researchers and analysts like text, numbers and girth. Graphs and tables also are used, but they are usually constructed in a way that is more complex than most viewers will tolerate.  Often, a policy analyst will also drop in a few stock photos that characterize the general subject matter, such as a photo of a train in a report about transit.

But that’s not what I’m talking about here.  I’m talking about pieces where bold graphics, illustrations, symbols and headlines quickly tell the gist of the most important findings at-a-glance.  Examples can be viewed here and here.

Wonks often assume that their responsibility for communicating ends with the final footnote in their official report.  But research shows that text-based communications alone aren’t an adequate convey the information to busy audiences.  For a number of reasons, visuals are necessary:

  • VISUALS ARE MORE COMPELLING.  People follow directions 323% better when illustrations accompany text.  Moreover, significantly more people are persuaded by presentations accompanied by visuals than by presentations lacking visuals.
  • VISUALS ARE MORE BITE-SIZED.  Human brains can process and absorb the meaning of a symbol in 250 milliseconds.  That kind of speed matters to busy people seeking short-cuts to manage massive amounts of information coming at them.
  • VISUALS ARE MORE MEMORABLE.  Our brains remember only about 10% of what they hear and 20% of what they read, but they remember 80% of what they see and do.  As they say in the advertising world, visuals are more “sticky.”

Infographic_on_infographicsHow do I know about this research?  From a 60-second visit to a Googleable infographic about infographics, of course.  That’s the way we do it in the latter half of 2013.

The other critically important reason to invest heavily in graphic design is:

  • VISUALS ARE SHAREABLE.  In a world that is increasingly shaped by social media-based information-sharing, infographics are constantly shared.  At the same time, lengthy reports rarely get shared, and usually get ignored when they are shared.  If an organization wants to be a bigger part of the billions of conversations happening in social media, they need to be producing quickly digestible visual summaries of their research findings.

So Minnesota wonks, visualize this:  Reduce your spending on paper, binding, ink, snail mail, gatherings, collateral materials and media relations.  Use the savings to invest in something that will make your work a lot more relevant — a long-term partnership between your analysts and an infographics artist.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was also featured in Politics in Minnesota’s “Best of the Blogs.”

Mullet Brotherhood Starts Draft Shelby Drive

Posted on by

Bloomington, Minn., July 31, 2013 — A national hair style advocacy group called the Mullet Brotherhood announced today that it was organizing a drive to draft legendary WCCO-TV anchorman Don Shelby to run for Congress against Minnesota 3rd Congressional District Representative Erik Paulsen.

After retiring from the anchor desk, Shelby became a cause celebre in the mullet-American advocacy community when he let his hair down, the hind half of it.  News reports that Shelby may run for Congress have caused a buzz among mullet activists anxious to see one of their own representing them in Washington.

“Former Governor Pawlenty had a chance become the first mulleted President, but unfortunately he dumped us for a Super PAC-approved cut,” said Floyd “Flow Joe” Joyner, President of the Mullet Brotherhood.  “We’ve long admired Mr. Shelby’s silver cascade, and would dearly love to see that bad boy in the Capitol Building.”

Joyner admitted that the road will be long for Shelby.  Protesters outside the news conference mocked Shelby and the group with various forms of hate speech, such as hockey hair, ten ninety, helmet hair, coupe Longueuil, haircut o’ death, neckwarmer, shorty longback, the 10-90, the Kentucky waterfall, the bi-level, the faded glory, the Ben Franklin, the Missouri Compromise, the Louisiana Purchase, the Camaro crash helmut, the business cut (business in front, party in the back), the LPGA, the soccer flip, the convertible, the Tennessee top hat, the Canadian passport, the New Jersey neckwarmer, the Chattanooga choo choo, and the neck blanket and the Wisconsin waterfall.

“If that ‘Wisconsin waterfall’ label sticks, that could be the end for Shelby,” said Dr. Harold Cloister, political science professor at St. Thomas University.  “I’d look for Shelby’s handlers to spin it as more of a Minnesota Mudflap.”

With the exception of a few short-lived fads, hind heavy hair has been slow to be accepted in contemporary mainstream society.  Though fossil records indicate that homo sapiens with primitive mullets have walked the Earth for at least 130,000 years, it was 2001 before the word “mullet” even appeared in dictionaries.  Mullet activists see a Shelby candidacy as a historic opportunity to normalize the oppressed mulleted minority.

“We did have Governor Ventura in the State Capitol a few years back, but to be honest there is a rather ugly debate within our community about whether a skullet should be considered to be in the mullet family,” said Joyner.  “Naturally, we value all forms of unbridled neck hair, but many feel that crown-based flow is a necessary element of the art form.  But dandy Don’s ape drape, dude, we all get goose bumps about that mofo.”

Joyner announced the launch of a Draft Shelby website www.DonsDo4u.com.  Along with a draft petition, the site also is selling “Don’s Do 4U” trucker’s hats, with a faux silver mullet flowing from the back.

Mr. Shelby refused to comment for this story.  However, in previous news reports he has indicated that he has not yet ruled out becoming “a terrible congressman.”

End State Senate Confirmation Authority

Posted on by

In a State Capitol environment rife with puerile debates, the most inane are those associated with confirmation of gubernatorial nominations to cabinet posts.

The State Senate pours too much blood, sweat, tears and time into confirmations. DFLers especially have used confirmations as a partisan bludgeon, rejecting Chris Georgacus in 1997, Steve Minn in 2000 (twice), Cheri Pierson Yecke in 2000, and Carol Molnau in 2008.   Republicans haven’t blocked as many because they have held the Governor’s office for so long, but they did return the favor in 2012 by rejecting DFLer Ellen Anderson.

These tit-for-tat games are a waste of time and largely inconsequential.  Usually, the nominees are just toyed with before being approved, but the toying itself expends too much legislative time and goodwill.  Even in the relatively rare instance when a nominee is rejected – usually due to political score-settling rather than the nominee being unqualified or corrupt — the Governor simply puts forward a new nominee who has the same basic policy positions as the rejected nominee.  The scene resembles a dog chasing its tail.

These confirmation debates represent the worst kind of scab picking in an institution that needs to heal key relationships in order to make more consequential policymaking possible.  Picked scabs leave lasting pain and scars that impact the long-term ability of our state government to reach constructive compromises.

In an era when the executive branch and legislative branch vigorously compete against each other like the Minnesota Vikings and the Green Bay Packers, the legislative confirmation authority is the functional equivalent of  the Packers possessing veto authority over which players the Vikings may have on their team.  A Governor from any party should be able to choose his own team, and immediately put them on the field without waiting for the approval from the other team.

So I have a simple reform proposal:  Stop it.  Stop requiring legislative approval of the Governor’s cabinet members.  Just stop it.

I know the confirmation requirement is traditional and legally mandated, but laws and traditions can be changed.  Minnesota’s future success is not dependent on the continuation of the confirmation process, but it is dependent on legislators not clawing each others eyes out over issues that simply don’t matter that much.

I did take a civics class a long time ago, so I realize there is a downside of this.  An imprudent Governor could choose a nominee who is grossly incompetent, inexperienced, and/or unethical.  That can happen.

But when it does happen, legislators have the ability to expose the Governor’s flawed nominee in the news media and campaigns, and let voters decide whether the nomination bothers them enough to take it out on the Governor and his party at the ballot box.  Yes, legislative confirmations are a check on gubernatorial power.  But two checks on gubernatorial nominations already exist – freedom of speech and elections.  The third check – Senate confirmation votes — just isn’t needed.

Whatever small benefits confirmations may have are dwarfed by the substantial wear and tear they put on policymaker relationships.  Ending gubernatorial nomination confirmations certainly won’t stop bloodshed at the Capitol.  But it will stop one of the more trifling reasons for bloodshed.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was also featured by MinnPost Blog Cabin and Politics in Minnesota’s “Best of the Blogs.”

Political Cliches on Amobarital

Posted on by

I suppose it’s a cliché to point out that politicians speak in  clichés.   Their wall-to-wall use of bromides to mask deeper political truths has made political news conferences and speeches a rhetorical wasteland.  Everyone can finish the sentences of the politician speaking:

“We must grow the _______.”

“We must invest in the _____.”

“Our greatest natural resource is our ______.”

“Economy,” “future” and “people/children,” right?  No wonder the masses only perk up for scandals.  They spice up an  utterly predictable political discourse.

To cut through the cliches and learn what politicians really think, what if we snuck a little amobarbital — sometimes used as a “truth serum” to obtain information from those who are unable or unwilling to tell the truth — into the water bottles at the podium of State Capitol news conferences? The first sentence or two would be the predictable, carefully focus-grouped political clichés.  But then, bam, it’s amobarital time, baby!

“It’s time for the Legislature to do what ordinary Minnesota families do when they encounter difficult financial times.  Mom and dad gather around the kitchen table, they thoughtfully review their household finances, and they have tough conversations about how they could cut the family budget to make ends meet.

(Amobarital kicks in)

But then most of those dads and moms say “screw it” and run up their high interest credit cards instead.   After all, that’s why the Federal Reserve reports that consumer debt is at an all time high of $2.75 TRILLION.  So whatever the Legislature does, it should not, I repeat, NOT act like those ordinary Minnesota moms and dads grappling with their financial future at the good old kitchen table.”

For the record, State Capitol Police Force, I understand that drugging elected officials would be an ill-advised and felonious act that I am not seriously contemplating or encouraging.  But a boy can dream, can’t he?

– Loveland

America Has Gotten Much Better Since 1776, Not Worse

Posted on by

The other day when listening to sports talk radio I was treated to Original Mattress Factory CEO and pitch man Ron Trzcinski wishing me a Happy Independence Day.  In his most recent commercial radio ad, Trzcinksi gets off his box spring and on to his soapbox:

“This is Ron Trzcinski.  Our founders intended this country to be one of limited power, created expressly to protect our rights. As time has progressed, however, it has become less limited in scope and our rights less secure.”

This assertion, the same used by Tea Party activists these days, is softer than one of Mr. Trzcinski’s premium mattresses.  Lets get real, Ron.  If you are an American woman, racial minority, religious minority, or gay person, your rights are much more secure now than they were in colonial times.   Quaint little colonial customs like slavery, hanging for sodomy and Native American genocide are, thank goodness, things of the past.  For the most part, state and federal laws no longer treat American women like legal incompetents, akin to children and criminals.  States like Massachusetts no longer ban  non-Christians from holding office, or require Catholic officeholders to formally renounce papal authority.

Does Mr. Trzcinski really want to take us back to those “good old days?”  The truth is, the rights of Americans are much more secure than they were in colonial times.

As for Trzcinksi’s point about limited government, it is true that the United States has more government than it did in the colonial times, just as every industrialized nation on the planet does.  The American government that American citizens have freely chosen, via their representative democracy, has given us dramatically better education, health care, water, homes, national security, food, working conditions, environment, medical research, consumer protection, police and fire protection and a myriad of other things most colonial citizens lacked.  That’s why polls continually show that Americans want more government services, not less.

Does Mr. Trzcinski really want America to take us back to those days of bare bones government?

Rather than comparing the governments of two vastly different historic eras –colonial America versus contemporary America — it is much more sensible to compare the United States with other contemporary industrialized societies.  Making that comparison, it becomes clear that America still has very limited government.  When you look at government revenue as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), Americans pay 27% (includes state, local and federal taxes combined), according to the conservative Heritage Foundation.  (It should be noted that a sizable portion of that 27% is used to fund the largest military and counter-terrorism initiative in the world, a heavy burden that other nations don’t bear. )  Americans’ tax bill is much less than the 29% paid by Mexicans, the 31% paid by Irish and Australians, the 32% paid by Canadians, the 34% paid by Poles, the 35% paid by Brazilians, the 39% paid by British,  the 41% paid by Germans, the 44% paid by Norwegians, the 44% paid by Fins, the 45% paid by the French, or the 46% paid by the Swedes.

It simply is not true that since colonial times Americans have been losing all of their rights and being overrun by a vast government.  America accomplished truly great things on July 4, 1776 that are well worth celebrating.  But we need to celebrate the truth of 1776, not the delusional Tea Party spin.  Most importantly, we need to celebrate how much more true America has gotten to its Declaration of Independence values over the past 237 years.

– Loveland

 

DisHonourable

Posted on by

Minnesota GOP gubernatorial candidate Scott Honour has a surname that sounds as if it was fabricated by a team of political consultants.  What, “Bob Dignity” wasn’t available to run for governor?

I don’t know a lot about Mr. Honour’s pre-political life, but from what he has published on his website biography, he sounds like a pleasant chap and a capable business person.

But so far, his performance since becoming a politician does not live up to the expectations set by his surname.

Mr. Honour has been busy making the case that Minnesota state government spending is out-of-control.  For instance, this campaign video claims:

“Did you know that our state is spending over twice as much per citizen as when I graduated from high school in 1984?  It sure doesn’t feel like we’re getting twice as much value for our money.”

That’s a potent political statement.  But is it an honorable statement?  A truly honorable leader would acknowledge that the median household income when Mr. Honour graduated from high school in 1984 was $22,415.00, while in February 2013 median household income had grown to $51,404, more than twice as high as it was in 1984.

As a successful businessperson, Mr. Honour surely understands that as household incomes have more than doubled between 1984 and 2013, the cost of just about everything else, including the major things government has to purchase – medical care, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, energy, asphalt, private and public sarlaries, technology, real estate, construction materials, etc. — have also gotten dramatically more expensive.  He is a bright and experienced enough businessperson to understand that economic reality, but he is not honorable enough to publicly acknowledge it.

So what’s the truth about state government spending in Minnesota.  A thoughtful and thorough Minnesota 2020 analysis recently found:

Adjusted for inflation, accounting shifts, state takeovers, and the tobacco bond sale, Minnesota is spending about $5.2 billion less (in 2012-13 dollars) than it was a decade ago. That’s roughly $730 less per capita, or an 18 percent decline in state expenditures.

Claims of rapid state spending growth are based on comparisons that fail to account for inflation, population, school funding shifts, and other one-time events that distort spending over time.

If legislature implements Governor Dayton’s current budget plan, by FY 2016-17 Minnesota’s adjusted per capita spending would still be $500 less than it was a decade ago (FY 2002-03).

Continue reading →

5 Reasons the DFL Will Hold Their Ground in 2014

Posted on by

Yesterday, I made the case for why the DFL may lose ground in 2014.   For my DFL friends who are now out on the ledge staring into the inky abyss, here are five reasons to not jump.  Yet.

DFL Has A Broader Base.  Minnesota is a fairly solid blue state these days.  According a recent Public Policy Polling survey, there are significantly more Minnesotans who say they are Democrats (38%) than Republicans (27%).  That’s a big reason why the polls show that DFL state legislators have a significantly better, though not good, approval rating (36% approve) than Republican state legislators (23% approve).  It also probably explains why the DFL starts the campaign season ahead in generic head-to-head races, with a generic DFL candidate preferred by a six point margin (47% for the generic DFLer and 41% for the generic Republican).   Again,  the DFL’s seasonal voters have to be energized get off the proverbial couch to vote in a non-presidential year, but an average DFL legislative candidates does start the race with a significantly broader base than their Republican opponents.  That’s a big deal. Continue reading →

5 Reasons the DFL Will Lose Ground in 2014

Posted on by

Will the DFL lose ground in state legislative elections in 2014?  Following the 2013 legislative session, there are a lot of things swirling around  suggesting that they might.  In no particular order, here are five things to watch:

Freshman Frailty.  Newly elected DFL freshman won in lots of places in 2012 where they were not expected to win.  There was a good reason why they were not expected to win.  Many of these are difficult districts for DFLers to hang onto under the best of circumstances, and the circumstances will be more difficult than they were in 2012 (see below).  That could make many in this large freshman class of DFLers one hit wonders. Continue reading →

Legislators Defending Gay Marriage Vote Should Ask “What Would Wellstone Do?”

Posted on by

If I was a DFL state legislator in St. Paul or Minneapolis who supports gay marriage, I’d be elated about today’s Star Tribune Minnesota Poll showing 46% of Minnesotans agreeing with “the Legislature’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage.”  After all, two-thirds (66% agree) of residents of Hennepin and Ramsey Counties and even more DFLers (78% agree) are on my side.

But if the majority of my constituents were outside of those core Twin Cities counties  (only 37% agree), over 35 years old (only 41% agree) or earning under $50,000 per year (only 37% agree), I’d be on edge.

A lot of newly elected DFL freshman are in this position.  If I were them, I would be thinking WWWD – What Would Wellstone Do?

The late Senator Paul Wellstone was much more liberal than the majority of his constituents, just as DFLers in Greater Minnesota are on this issue.  Still, Wellstone was widely respected, even by those who disagreed with him, in large part because he was proactive, sincere, respectful, civil, unapologetic and direct about his disagreements with constituents.  When explaining differences, he made values-driven arguments, not politics-driven arguments. Continue reading →

Minnesotans Support Tax Increases, BUT…

Posted on by

That stale breeze you detect when driving down John Ireland Boulevard this morning is a result of taut DFL legislators exhaling en masse as they cuddle up with today’s Star Tribune Minnesota Poll finding that 58% of Minnesotans support their $2 billion tax increase on top wage earners, while 64% support their $1.60 per pack cigarette tax increase.

“Some New Taxes” Beats “No New Taxes”

Republicans and their well-funded special interest backers have spent decades aggressively pushing “no new taxes” messaging to Minnesotans, almost to the exclusion of all other economic issues.  This survey shows that Minnesotans just aren’t buying it.   It shows that  “some new taxes” is a message that sells pretty well with Minnesotans.  It also shows that DFLers, after flirting with scores of potential tax increases during the 2013 session, finally settled on two politically palatable taxes.  So, there’s a lot of good news for DFLers in these findings. Continue reading →

South Dakota Guv’s Fiscal Race-to-the Bottom Not A Selling Point for Minnesotans With Dakota Roots

Posted on by

Dear South Dakota Governor Dennis Daugaard:

I’ve been pondering your recent “Dakota Roots” visits to Minnesota’s Mall of America to recruit South Dakota expatriates to return to their native state to strengthen South Dakota’s economy.    As the Star Tribune explains:

Dakota Roots was first launched under Daugaard’s predecessor (Republican Governor Mike Rounds) to address the state’s vexing problem. South Dakota needs more workers to take full advantage of its low unemployment rate (4.3 percent) and 10,000 unfilled jobs statewide, according to the governor’s staff.

As the name suggests, Dakota Roots is designed to lure people who perhaps grew up in South Dakota and had moved away, or went to college there, or had parents or grandparents from the state.

As a native South Dakotan living in the Twin Cities, I’ve been giving your pitch some thought.  There’s a lot of what you are selling that is attractive to me.  I have treasured family and friends in South Dakota.  I miss the expansive prairie skies framing breathtakingly beautiful fields of sunflowers or bison.  I love many of the changes that have happened since I left Sioux Falls about 30 years ago, such as the Washington Pavillion, Parker’s Bistro, Josiah’s Coffee, Spezia, Zanbroz and the rejuvenated Falls Park.  I admire the populist spirit of South Dakotans, and the pride they have in a place and culture that too few Americans have taken the time to understand and appreciate. Continue reading →

Will Target Put Emmer Back In Its Shopping Cart?

Posted on by

Talk radio pundit and former state legislator Tom Emmer is running to become the new Michele Bachmann.  He fits the part.  Remember, this is the guy who sponsored a “nullification” amendment to the Minnesota Constitution that says Minnesota won’t obey any American laws – civil rights protections, interstate commerce rules, banning of health insurance pre-existing condition limitations, etc. – unless the Minnesota Legislature agrees to do so by a two-thirds majority, a threshold that in recent times has proven to be nearly unattainable.

In other words, Mr. Emmer wants to go to Washington to set federal laws, which he wants Minnesotans to ignore.  It makes perfect sense.

If Mr. Emmer can win the GOP nomination, he will become the new Michele, since Bachmann’s district has been custom gerrymandered for GOP domination.  There won’t be a lot of suspense in that general election contest.

But one interesting question that remains is whether Minnesota-based Target Corporation will again back Emmer, and his anti-choice, anti-fair wage, anti-gay rights, anti-tax, anti-contraceptive, and pro-nullification ways.

To be fair, an  Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel vigorously defended its 2010 backing of Emmer by insisting that he was merely purchasing the anti-tax and anti-fair wage portion of Emmer, not the anti-choice, anti-gay rights, anti-contraceptive, pro-nullification portion of him.

Continue reading →

Wry Wing Puppetry

Posted on by

December 17, 2013 Wry Wing Politics Post

Maybe legislators could authorize some kind of independent Legislative Salary Commission to set salaries.  The Commission could be appointed by the Governor, to insulate legislators from public blame for subsequent salary increases.

May 28, 2013 Star Tribune Editorial

The (constitutional) amendment (about legislative compensation that the 2013 Legislature sent to the 2016 ballot) would hand responsibility for setting legislative pay to a commission — appointed by the governor and chief justice of the Supreme Court — on which no legislator, former legislator, lobbyist or former lobbyist could serve. Appointees would be evenly split between the two largest political parties at the Legislature.  The amendment offers no guarantee of a pay raise. The proposed commission would be as free to cut pay as to increase it.

I’m going to take a nap now.  Being ominpotent can be exhausting.

Loveland

Moderate Middle Copping Out About 2013 Session

Posted on by

With Republicans trained like parrots to repeat the word “overreach” and DFLers repeating the word “progress,” political reporters are reporting that the public is giving the session “mixed reviews.”

As far as the 2014 state legislative elections are concerned, that leaves things in the hands of swing voters.   What staunch partisans on both sides conclude about the 2013 session is not particularly important, because those activists were never likely to change their minds between now and November 2014.  They are not the biggest electoral variables. Continue reading →

If the DFL Wants To Impress, Leave Early

Posted on by

The new DFL majority in the Minnesota State Legislature is anxious to prove to voters that it is better equipped to lead than the previous Republican majority.  The DFL agenda has essentially been the polar opposite of the Republican agenda.  Whatever Republicans did, DFLers are undoing.  Republicans used Minnesota schools as their personal ATM to “balance” their budget.  DFLers are rushing to pay school kids back. Republicans used budget gimmicks instead of fixing the long-term structural deficit.  DFLers are increasing taxes and cutting spending to close the long-term structural deficit. Republicans tried to restrict the freedom to marry.  DFLers are expanding it.

Those are all good and important changes.  But of all the things that DFLers could do to impress Minnesota the swing voters who will determine in 2014 which party remains in control of the Legislature, I submit that the most memorable and impressive achievement would be to adjourn early.

I’m serious.  Declare victory and vamoose early.  Voters would adore legislators for it. Continue reading →

The Real Heroes Of The Gay Marriage Debate

Posted on by

As the Minnesota House debates legislation to extend the freedom to marry to gay people, I’ve been reflecting on my own journey on this issue.  I suspect I’m not alone.

My first exposure to homosexuality was being called a “fag,” “queer,” “homo” or “mo” on the playground of my Catholic elementary school.  Before I alarm people, this isn’t a confession, at least not the kind you may be thinking.

Continue reading →

Fighting Terrorism With A Stiff Upper Lip

Posted on by

Days after the bombings at the Boston Marathon finish line, Facebook, Twitter and the news media are still awash in borderline hysterical outcries.  I understand the sentiment.  The video of the acts is seared into our memories, and we feel the need to show support for our Bostonian neighbors.  Those are good and natural instincts.

Still, some of it gets a little maudlin and over-the-top.  It’s worth noting that the ultimate point of terrorism isn’t actually killing.  It is terror.  Terrorists want their killing and maiming to get blown out of proportion by the news media and our leaders, so that it dominates our psyches and disrupts our freedom and pursuit of happiness.

In other words, the only thing terrorists have to fear is the inability to promote fear itself. Continue reading →

Who is the MN GOP Representing on Gun Background Checks?

Posted on by

In politics, presidential candidates who win the support of over 60% of Americans are said to have won overwhelming “landslide” victories.  Harding’s 60.3% in 1920. FDR’s 60.8% in 1936. Johnson’s 61.1% in 1964. and Nixon’s 60.7% in 1972.  Landslides!

It is so difficult to get 60% of Americans to agree on politics, that such “landslide victories” are considered highly unusual indications of a historically overwhelming level of public sentiment.

In Minnesota right now, Minnesotans of all walks of life, including Republicans, Independents, gun owners and Greater Minnesota citizens, are giving a landslide victory to gun background checks: Continue reading →