Never Forget How You Made Them Feel

Posted on by

 “People will forget what you said.

People will forget what you did.

But people will never forget how you made them feel.”

Maya Angelou

angelou_inauguralAt the first Clinton inauguration where Maya Angelou read, I somehow found myself on the Capitol lawn.

But I made a bad rookie parent mistake, and brought my two-year old toddler daughter along to the solemn (and freezing) event.  So unfortunately I was more focused on keeping my restless daughter quiet than on Angelou’s words.

I truly don’t remember a single word Angelou read.

But I distinctly remember how uplifted and hopeful it felt when she walked away from the podium. I remember that more vividly than I do about any other part of that day.  I know it sounds contrived, particularly from a cynical guy like me, but we all seemed to be feeling the “pulse of morning,” with new leadership and new optimism.

That was a hell of a long time ago.  That restless two-year old daughter is now out of college.  But “people will never forget how you made them feel.”

– Loveland

Super Bowl Bid Bust: Why Are We Destroying The Yard With The Pole Building?

Posted on by

Minneapolis_The_Yard_winterYou may have seen the artist renderings.  The drawings lay out a vision for The Yard, the planned four-acre urban park adjacent to the mammoth new Vikings Stadium.  In the winter versions, the park is shown populated by happy, hearty Minnesota families  skating, admiring ice sculptures, making snow angels and generally laughing in the face of Old Man Winter.

Minneapolis_skating_outdoorsWhen I look at that rendering, I can clearly hear the soundtrack.

“When it snows,
ain’t it thrilling?  
Though your nose
gets a chilling. 
We’ll frolic and play
the Eskimo way. 
Walking in a winter wonderland.”

That, my friends, is us.  Minneapolis has the best park system in the nation, because Minneapolitans loves them some outdoor activities in all seasons.  That’s why this little outdoor space has emerged as one of the more intriguing, unifying and endearing elements of the Minneapolis stadium area vision.   It is a quintessential Minnesota kind of space being built on Minnesota’s most visible stage.

But the corporate types dreaming up the Super Bowl bid don’t see it that way.  They  promised the NFL muckety-mucks that they would replace The Yard with, well, The Pole Barn.

Minneapolis_super_bowl_-_Google_SearchWell, technically, I guess it’s going to be a tent, but in the artist’s renderings, the ginormous grad party tent looks more like a poultry pole barn to me.  To be fair, it does have a very snazzy Super Bowl LII logo on the roof, making it one of the more swank pole barns I’ve ever seen.

I understand what the Vikings owner Zygi Wilf and his merry band of corporate boosters are shooting for with this idea.  They wanted to reassure delicate NFL billionaire owners who have heard nasty rumors about Minnesota weather that we are in possession of heat, and are prepared to pipe it in wherever the partying swells desire it.

But making The Yard into the The Pole Building is going too far.  We don’t want the Goodyear blimp’s panoramic shots of  Super Bowl LII to portray a generic Super Bowl scene.   We want those  shots to portray a uniquely Minnesota Super Bowl scene.  We want to show the world happy, hearty Minnesotans laughing in the face of Old Man Winter.

After all, we are who we are, and we should be proud of who we are.  We want to show the world that Minnesotans don’t just survive winter weather; we find ways to have fun in winter weather.  Showing everyone skulking into an ugly heated tent paints quite the opposite picture.

To be clear, I’m strongly in favor of heat in February.  By all means, heat the airport, taxis, buses, trains, transit stations, skyways, hotels, convention center, shopping centers, restaurants, bars, strip joints, water parks, indoor skating rinks, theaters, museum and, of course, stadium.  Heck, I’d even be okay cranking it up a few extra degrees for those couple of weeks.

But don’t, repeat don’t heat, sterilize and corporatize the outdoor space that we are building to frolick and play the Eskimo way on the national stage.  Super Bowl week or not, let’s let Minneapolis be Minneapolis.

Loveland

Note:  This post also appeared on streets.mn.

News Flash: Candidate Announces a Running Mate…zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Posted on by

KuisleIn recent years, it feels like the quantity of political reporting in daily newspapers has dropped off.  Whether a function of smaller newsrooms, editors who believe the public wants less political coverage, editors who are gun shy about provocative political topics, or something else, there just seems to be less political coverage.

Political reporters do still cover the most predictable, scripted and formal of political events — candidacy filings and announcements, campaign finance filings, party endorsement events, and running mate announcements.   For the most part, the public snores through all of this formulaic coverage of predictable events.

Case in point:  Today’s Star Tribune carried a fairly in-depth article about Hennepin County Commissioner and gubernatorial candidate Jeff Johnson picking Guy I’ve Never Heard Of as his Lieutenant Governor running mate.   In this article, we are earnestly briefed about the selection of someone who almost certainly won’t impact the outcome of the gubernatorial race, and almost certainly wouldn’t have substantive duties if he somehow beat the odds and actually got the job.

What is even better is that we can look forward to this kind of scintillating “candidate chooses running mate” coverage for each of the multitudes of candidates in the gubernatorial race.  Spoiler alert:  Each candidate will be picking someone brilliant who is “balancing their ticket” in some fashion.

Meanwhile, more important and interesting things go uncovered or undercovered.

  • When congressional candidate and big box store heir Stuart Mills III airs a TV ad portraying himself a self-made man who treats his workers well, there is no newspaper  probing of those two claims.
  • When Senator Al Franken films an ad implying he has been working overtime to help small businesses get high skilled workers, there is no probing of the veracity of that claim.
  • When shadowy independent expenditure groups’ attack ads are aired, there is too little work put into trying to learn about the financial backing for the ads, and whether the groups’ claims are based in fact.
  • When Candidate A criticizes Policy X while refusing to offer a detailed alternative, there is too little exposing that act of political cowardice and intellectual dishonesty.

These are shadowy areas where savvy, sleuthing political reporters could actually shed light.  But when political operatives figure out that lying and hiding won’t get exposed, guess what, lying and hiding proliferates.  When that happens, our democracy gets weaker.

I hope this isn’t an either/or issue.  Maybe there still is enough capacity in newsrooms and column inches in newspapers to cover both the formulaic stories and the more probing stories.  That would be ideal.  But if there no longer is enough journalistic capacity for both types of coverage, our democracy needs the latter much more than it needs the former.

– Loveland

Stewart Mills’ Ad On Truth Serum

Posted on by

This is the script of a political ad that was recently released by conservative Republican Stewart Mills III, who is running against DFL Congressman Rick Nolan in Minnesota’s 8th Congressional District.  The ad shows young Stew the third sporting the orange shirt worn by front line employees at the Mills Fleet Farm chain of big box stores that his family operates.

I’m Stuart Mills.  My family operates Mills Fleet Farm.

As a teenager, I worked here stocking shelves.  (chuckle)  Then I got promoted to mopping floors.

Now I run the health care program for thousands of our employees and their families.

Everyday, I see how Obamacare hurts small businesses and the middle class.

As your congressman, I’ll replace it.

I’m Stewart Mills and I approve this message, because we need to grow the middle class and get Minnesota back to work.

Stewart_Mills_III_orange_shirt

If Stew the third were injected with truth serum, the ad might sound more like this:

I’m Stewart Mills the third.  My family operates Mills Fleet Farm.

As a teenager, I worked there stocking shelves.  (chuckle)  Then I said,  screw this, daddy, make me a top executive faster than everyone else.  And he did.

In other words, I was born on third base, but think I hit a triple.

Now I’m fighting to protect my millions of dollars in inherited wealth.

But every day in Minnesota I see how 350,000 minimum wage workers have gotten a raise, 95,000 have new Medicaid coverage, and 2.3 million with pre-existing conditions have gotten their coverage protected through Obamacare.

As your congressman, I would oppose those things, and  offer no alternatives.

I’m Stewart Mills III, and a bunch of other folks with inherited wealth approve of this message, because they want a fellow silver spooner growing the upper class and putting ordinary Minnesotans back in their place.

 

Note:  This post was featured in Politics in Minnesota‘s Best of the Blogs.

Target Minimum Wage Employee Would Need To Work 1.7 million Hours To Earn What Target Board Is Paying Failed CEO In Severance

Posted on by

Target_Steinhafel Hiding behind a group called Minnesotans for a Fair Economy, Target’s top executives have been vehemently opposing  Minnesota’s recently enacted minimum wage increase.  Much too high, Target executives said.

Today the Star Tribune reported that Target CEO Gregg W. Steinhafel, after essentially being fired due to poor company performance under his leadership, is being given a severance package worth a cool $16,000,000.

Even earning Minnesota’s newly minted minimum wage — the minimum wage that Steinhafel said was too extravagant —  it would take one of Target’s minimum wage workers about 1,684,210 hours , or 210,526 full-time shifts, to earn what the failed CEO is being given as a departing gift from his  Board of Directors.

This all too familiar snapshot of corporate America shows how the U.S. has evolved to the point where we  now have  the most unequal distribution of wealth of any advanced economy in the world.

– Loveland

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

True Confession: I Miss The GOP-Controlled Legislature

Posted on by

When it comes to the 2014 legislative elections, I have divided loyalties.

One the one hand, the current DFL-controlled Legislature has delivered a lot of very good things for ordinary Minnesotans.  Compared to the previous GOP-controlled Legislature, the DFL-controlled Legislature has delivered a healthier economy, budget surpluses, more tax fairness, marriage equality, job-creating infrastructure improvement projects, paid back schools, all-day kindergarten, early education scholarships and a long overdue increase in the minimum wage, among other things.

In the most recently concluded session, they even had the earliest adjournment in thirty years, a mark of impressive democratic efficiency. I look at that record and conclude that the DFL Legislature and Governor deserve to be rehired in the upcoming elections.

clown_carOn the other hand, as a blogger interested in the absurd side of politics, I’m pulled mightily in the opposite direction.  Because when it comes to generating a steady stream of blog-worthy absurdity, nothing beats the modern Tea Party-backed Republican Party.  After all, the last time the Republicans controlled the Minnesota Legislature they:

  • No Separation Between Church and Hate.  Found a way to make even the daily ecumenical prayer controversial and divisive;
  • Dehumanizing Kids.  Warned that supplying food stamps to Minnesota’s most vulnerable children is just as inadvisable as feeding wild animals; and

I get tears of joy just thinking about it. I was never in need of blog topics in those days.  Minnesota’s last GOP-controlled Legislature gave us the golden age of political comedy, and I will forever be grateful to them for that.   Memories, misty water-colored memories.

While a historically low 17% of Minnesotans approved of the GOP-controlled Legislature that was drummed out of office in 2012, Wry Wing Politics has sorely missed having the likes Mary Fransen, Steve Drazkowski,  Mark Buesgens, Tom Emmer, Curt Bills, Kurt Zellers, Dave Thompson, Amy Koch and others in positions of authority, where they had more opportunities to say and do ridiculous things.

The topic-hungry blogger in me pines for the hot mess of a Legislature that Teapublicans  built.  But deep down the responsible citizen in me knows that I need to vote to bring back the DFL’s brand of colorless competence.  Sigh.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was featured as a “best of the best” in MinnPost’s Blog Cabin.

Legislative Pay Commission: Where Have We Heard That Before?

Posted on by

moses_mt__sinaiRegular readers – happy Mother’s Day mom – may remember that on December 12, 2012, during a 40-day, 40-night junket to Mt. Sinai, Wry Wing Politics heard a voice telling it:

…we pay the folks who make our laws, struggle with our most controversial societal issues, and manage billions of our hard earned tax dollars substantially less than we pay the average sewage worker ($37,000/year), clown ($38,000/year), mall cop ($45,000/year), social worker ($40,000/year), and garbage collector ($43,000/year).

Minnesota’s legislative salaries are set by the Legislature.  Obviously, legislators don’t keep their salaries at $31,141 because they think it’s the correct level to draw the best people.  They do it because they realize that raising their own salary brings the voters’ wrath.  Their salary-related decisionmaking is driven by fear, not an objective market assessment.

This is an area that is ripe for reform.  …there must be a way to take legislator salary-setting away from legislators, and stop all of this destructive self-flagellation.

WWP then delivereth stone pixel tablets authoritatively declaring:

Maybe legislators could authorize some kind of independent Legislative Salary Commission to set salaries.

Confronted with the profound wisdom embodied in said stone pixel tablets, legislators saweth the light, and yesterday passed legislation to put on the ballot a state constitutional amendment spinfully titled “Remove Lawmakers’ Power to Set Their Own Pay.”

If ultimately embraced by the Senate and Governor, the ballot measure would ask voters whether the Minnesota Constitution should “be amended to remove state lawmakers’ power to set their own salaries, and instead establish an independent, citizens-only council to prescribe salaries for lawmakers?”

Blogging doesn’t pay much, but the whole omnipotence thing doesn’t suck.

Will Progressives Step Up To Support An Unapologetic “Class Warrior?”

Posted on by

class_warfare_buffet_quoteFor the last several years, too many political debates have gone roughly like this:

A progressive pol points out the obvious, that wealth is getting too concentrated, and that the wealthy donors are controlling the political system as a means to accumulate still more wealth.

Then, conservatives, moderates and conservative-controlled news outlets cry in unison “Class warfare,” and “both sides do it.”

Then, the progressive politician timidly drops the subject, and agrees to their risk averse consultants’ demands that they henceforth sugar coat their campaign rhetoric.

This familiar scenario has played out hundreds of times over many decades, and that is why the United States now has the most unequal distribution of wealth of any advanced economy in the world.

Let that fact sink in for a moment.  The home of the American dream now has the most unequal distribution of wealth of any advanced economy in the world.  Is that really okay with us?

It’s not okay with South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate Rick Weiland.  He looks to be a rare exception to the rule of political cowardice in the face of, gasp, “class warfare” accusations.

From the beginning, Weiland’s “Take It Back” campaign has been focused on battling the influence of big money.  For instance, he has said that the first bill he will introduce in Congress will be a constitutional amendment to limit campaign donations and spending.  The language of the amendment specifically calls out the need to limit the excessive influence of the wealthy.

This is not okay with the blog Constant Commoner, which is a more thoughtful than most conservative blog in South Dakota.  In a piece titled “The Problem With Prairie Populism, Rick Weiland Style,” the Commoner recently shot this across candidate Weiland’s bow.

Where Weiland’s message is out-of-synch with reality is the way it lumps wealthy interests into some sort of monolithic, unified political juggernaut bent on making life miserable for ordinary Americans.  This actually is way off the mark. The politics of big money simply don’t congeal that way.   CNBC’s Robert Frank writes a nice critique and analysis of the study I reference and calls attention to the fact that for every right wing rich guy promoting schemes that Democrats abhor, there’s probably a wealthy leftie advocating the opposite. As Frank notes, for every Koch there’s a Buffett.

Historically, this is the point when progressive politicians would always obediently slink back to the mushy middle of American politics, like a scolded lapdog who had been caught pissing the Persian rug.  But Weiland didn’t do that.  Instead, he went right back onto the  blogger’s home turf to politely but assertively call bullshit:

Warren Buffet understands big money’s total triumph in public argumentation perfectly when he says, “There’s class warfare all right, but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

I’m sure Mr. Buffet has met Mr. Soros, and knows full well of the wide range of opinions within the billionaires club.  But Mr. Buffet also understands the bottom line, and knows that the actual, factual distribution of wealth is the bottom line.

I agree with Warren Buffet.  I believe the bottom line proves that the “big money” big foot against which I am campaigning hard not only exists, but is the fundamentally incorrect and unfair set of policy assumptions which must be slain before we can hope to right our course.

It is not true that the right to buy politicians is big monies free speech right.

It is not true that granting tax free status to offshore profits, and billionaires grand kids piggy banks, or bundling bad mortgages, helps spur productive economic growth.

The results of these untruths, propagated by our refusal to challenge the ascendant political myths of big money, are stunting our economy and defrauding our middle class.

Like Seymour’s plant in Little Shop of Horrors, their myths have been allowed to grow unchecked for far too long, and they must be pruned.

That is why I am campaigning against “big money.”

I’ve been waiting for a long time to see a courageous politician under pressure from the defenders of the status quo reply: “Class warfare? Hell yes I’m engaging in class warfare, on behalf of 99% of the rest of us!”

Everywhere_Man_-_YouTubeToday I saw it, and it was said exceptionally well.  Weiland is not only an unapologetic “class warrior,” but his campaign carries the optimistic tone of a “happy warrior,” in the tradition of Minnesota’s happy warrior Hubert Humphrey.

Finally, here’s a gritty leader who has a strong enough spine to declare himself an unrepentant class warrior, and he’s doing it in a wicked tough environment – a deep red state versus a billionaire-backed conservative Governor.  If  progressives around the country don’t step up to financially support this kind of progressive eloquence and courage under political fire, and instead continue to fund the same old milquetoast  timidity they have for decades, well, then they deserve what they have been getting from Congress.

– Loveland

Campaign Finance Reform En Vogue…Better Get This Marty Started

Posted on by

Democratic Pollster Stan Greenberg thinks one way for Democrats to mitigate their traditional midterm election setbacks is to stump for limits on the influence of big money on politics and policymaking.

In the wake of a couple of unpopular Supreme Court decisions that greatly increased the power of über-wealthy donors in elections, a recent Greenberg poll finds that campaign financing reform is very popular.  Greenberg tested support for the Government By The People Act (GBP), which would encourage small in-state contributions by establishing a capped 6-to-1 public financing matching program, and giving a tax credit to small donors.

Among the Democratic base that progressive candidates desperately need to turn out in 2012, this proposal is supported by a nearly 5-to-1 margin.  Among the Independent swing voters Democrats need to sway in the 2014 election, it enjoys a 3-to-1 supportive margin.

campaign_financing_poll_supportThanks to Senator John Marty (DFL-Roseville) and others, Minnesota has better campaign financing laws than most states.    But Minnesota’s campaign finance system could be improved, and this research shows this is an opportune time to propose improvements.

It’s too late for DFLers to pass campaign financing law improvements in 2013, but it’s not too late to inject the issue into the 2014 election debate.  This would be a great time for Marty to propose GBP-type rewards for small donors, and for DFL candidates to embrace them.  It’s the right thing to do substantively, and politically.

– Loveland

Al Franken: He’s Good Enough, He’s Smart Enough, and Doggone It People…Are A Little Bored With Him

Posted on by

Al_Franken_pencilWhen Al Franken started running for the U.S. Senate in Minnesota, a lot of Minnesotans worried he would embarrass them by becoming the class clown of the Senate.  Franken had been silly-to-outrageous as a comedian, talk radio host, and author, so Minnesotans understandably worried he would be a goofball as a senator as well.

But Franken ran a serious-minded campaign, narrowly defeated then-Senator Norm Coleman, and, according to polls, has won over many voters since then.

How did Franken convert the skeptics?  As a Senator, Franken hasn’t been the class clown.  In fact, he has been the class nerd, serious as a heart attack, even by stoic Minnesotan standards.  Franken has bent over backwards to show that he takes his job seriously, and he has had some serious legislative victories on important but obscure policy issues, such medical loss ratios, diabetes prevention, and promotion of agricultural energy technologies.

To paraphrase  Franken’s Saturday Night Live character Stuart Smalley, Senator Franken has proven to Minnesotans that he’s “good enough” and “smart enough.”   But when it comes to likability, sometimes it’s difficult for Minnesotans to warm up to Franken, simply because they don’t see his less serious side very often.

Being perceived as too serious is perhaps a good problem to have for a recovering comedian.  But it could pose a bit of a political challenge as Franken prepares to connect with voters during a reelection fight in a difficult year for Democrats.  After all, this is the same state that elected  the cartoonish Jesse Ventura, in part because Ventura’s humorous debate appearances helped Minnesota voters relate to him on a personal level.

Having proven that he can be serious and effective, I think Minnesotans now would be okay if Franken showed a bit of his humorous side more often.  He shouldn’t return to SNL or Air America form, but he could occassionally lighten it up.  After all, many serious-minded congressional leaders have shown that serious legislating and humor can go together.

 “It’s a great country, where anyone can grow up to be President…except me.” – Senator Barry Goldwater (R-AZ)

“They appear to have become so attached to their outrage that they are even more outraged that they won’t be able to be outraged anymore.”  Representative Barney Frank (D-MA)

“We have the same percentage of lightweights in Congress as you have in your hometown.  After all, it’s representative government.  Senator Alan Simpson (R-WY)

“I’ve never really warmed up to television and, in fairness to television, it’s never warmed up to me.” Senator Walter Mondale (D-MN)

“The difference between a caucus and a cactus is that the cactus has the pricks on the outside.”  Representative Mo Udall (D-AZ)

Meanwhile comedian Al Franken is here to tell us:

“Antitrust enforcement has always been more effective at stopping horizontal integration…than it has at this kind of vertical integration.”

Rimshot.

A New York Times headline recently noted Franken’s earnest dive into the complex Comcast-Time Warner merger is “No Joke.”  Don’t we know it.   When the subject turns to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, Franken’s eyes light up.  Most Minnesotans’ eyes glaze over.

I wholeheartedly applaud the studiousness and work ethic that Franken is bringing to his Senate duties.  In an age when self-serving circus ponies like Michele Bachmann can’t stop posing for the cameras long enough to accomplish anything for the people they serve, Congress needs more work horses like Franken to do the thoughtful legislating.

That focus on legislative plodding really does impact the lives of ordinary Americans.  For example, Franken’s “medical loss ratio” legislative victory may not make for scintillating water cooler discussions, but it is helping taxpayers save a remarkable $4 billion per year.   That’s billion with a “b.”  Unsung policy accomplishments like this are why I am thrilled to have Senator Serious representing me.

Still, debates aren’t only impacted by persistence and process mastery.  Congressional leaders like Bob Dole and Mo Udall proved that debates also can be informed and shaped by judicious use of humor.  Like Dole and Udall, Senator Franken has a special gift that all too few of his congressional colleagues possess.  After he is given a well-earned reelection victory, here’s hoping he feels more free to use it.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was featured as a “best of the best” by MinnPost’s Blog Cabin.

Five Reasons It’s Okay To Just Say “No” To Checkout Charities

Posted on by

Americans don’t lack for opportunities to donate to charities.  We are continually solicited by telephone, email, social media, mail, and door-to-door.

In recent years, we have added checkout counters to that list.  Now  many retail transactions are concluded with  “would you like to make a donation today to…?”   It’s not unusual to get solicited like this half a dozen times a day, day after day.

I’m not a fan.  It feels like the glaring checkout person is judging while customers are craning their necks to see what kind of sociopath would deny hope to the homeless puppies, cancer battlers or wounded warriors.  And I’m that kind of sociopath.

Good Brand Management?

I understand why charities like this approach.  It’s an opportunity to have third parties making their pitch to a captive audience who just happens to have it’s wallet wide open.  It also doesn’t hurt that the prospective donors’ peers are watching.    The checkout solicitations constitute free advertising and fundraising services delivered at a very opportune moment.

Nickels and dimes, you scoff?  This approach raises a great deal of money — $358 million from 63 charities in 2012 – with the charities barely lifting a finger.

no_solicitations_signI also understand why retailers like it.  The theory is that associating a retail brand with a warm and fuzzy charity makes the retailer feel more warm and fuzzy by association.   At first blush, it looks to be savvy brand management.

But is it?  While few openly complain, I have a feeling I’m not the only one grumpy about it.  There is a reason why you see so many “No Solicitation” signs in front of stores.  Because for many, being solicited is unpleasant and something we try to avoid.

Given how much retailers invest in optimizing the “customer experience “– the music, the lighting, the staff professionalism, the packaging, the flow of the store – it’s interesting how willing the same brand managers are to top off my customer experience with a big fat guilt trip that leaves me resenting them.  And they wonder why I’m increasingly shopping online?

Five Reasons to Not Give To Checkout Charities

 So I’m here to give you permission to say “no” to the homeless puppies.  If others want to give at checkout, I applaud them.  If that works for them, I’m all for it.  But there are plenty of reasons – altruistic reasons  even — to take a pass at the checkout counter, and donate on your own terms at another place and time.

Reason #1.  To give yourself time to research and prioritize.  Charities are not commodities.  Some are better than others.  Some fit your values better than others.  Some are more efficient than others.   Some produce better results than others. Maybe the charity soliciting at your favorite store is the best choice for you, but you won’t know until you take a little time to learn about them and others.  Most of us wouldn’t dream of investing our savings without doing a bit of research, so why would we invest in charitable work without first doing a little research?

Reason #2.  So you can nudge charities to get better.  When we are doing impulse giving at checkout stands, charities don’t have much competitive pressure to improve their services.  After all, why control your administrative costs and strive to get better results when your impulsive donors aren’t paying attention to those things.   When donors are doing their research, asking probing questions, and voting with their feet based on what they learn, charities improve their services so they can earn more donations.  And when charities improve their services, more people get helped.

Reason #3.  So you can stick to your philanthropic budget. Just as many set a household spending budget, it’s a good idea to have a personal philanthropic budget.  Let’s say your household budget says you can afford to donate $2,500 in a given year.  When you’re haphazardly giving micro-donations at checkouts, it’s difficult to tell if you are over or under that budget at the end of the year.

Reason #4.  So you can get the tax deduction owed to you.  Okay, I don’t want to go all Section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue code on you, but you probably already know that charitable giving is tax deductible.  However, it feels like almost no one tracks the $358 million per year in checkout donations.  Not taking advantage of that deduction can mean the loss of a fair amount of money at tax time.  That may strike you as awfully green eye shadey, but bypassing the charitable deduction is effectively throwing away money, money that you could choose to give charities.

Reason #5.  So you can discourage a proliferation of checkout shakedowns.  This much I promise you, the more we give at checkout, the more we will be solicited at checkout.  Non-profits copy whatever works for other non-profits.  So, if you don’t want to be continually solicited, you have to start declining.

Again, I’m not discouraging giving.  Please keep giving.  I’m just suggesting that it’s perfectly acceptable to deny the homeless puppies at the checkout counter and give on your own terms.  As Shakespeare’s Hamlet said, sometimes you “must be cruel only to be kind.”  If you ask me, the checkout counter shakedown is one of those times.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was also published in MinnPost.

Paul Begala: Wry Wing Politics Devotee

Posted on by

Okay, call me a rube, but my obscure little blog doesn’t get linked everyday in Tweets by national talking heads like Paul Begala.  So when it happens, I have to take a moment to feel self-important, before I slink back to my dark  corner of the world.

Begala_tweets_wry_wing_politics

 

Yes, Paul (I call him “Paul” now) links to among the least unique posts I’ve ever penned.  (And trust me, there is plenty of competition for that honor.)  Yes, it is surely his first and last visit to WWP.  Yes, this happened because of Rick Weiland’s great work, not mine.

But still, a sideways glance from Paul freakin’ Begala makes a backwater gadfly’s little heart go pitter-patter, and page views go through the roof.

I’m thinking I’m probably now on his holiday card list, right?

South Dakota’s Rick Weiland: A Different Kind of U.S. Senate Candidate

Posted on by

Most U.S. Senate candidates spend all of their time traveling to Wall Street, K Street, LaSalle Street, Montgomery Street, and Federal Street to beg for money from millionaires and billionaires who demand obedience after they’re elected.

Most U.S. Senate candidates produce phony cookie cutter ads whose stock photography make them all look and sound the same.

So, it’s refreshing to see at least one U.S. Senate candidate, South Dakota’s Rick Weiland, running a very different kind of campaign, on Main Streets running to reform Wall Street.    Three hundred and eleven South Dakota Main Streets, to be precise.

This video, shot and editied by the candidate’s son Nick, and song, performed by the candidate with family members and friends, isn’t the slickest thing you’ll ever see.  It might even be a little corny for some of you hipsters.  But it’s also a rare breath of fresh air in an all too polluted political atmosphere.

Billionaire Purchases Naming Rights To Uninsured South Dakotans

Posted on by

Sioux Falls, South Dakota — South Dakota billionaire banker and philanthropist T. Denny Sanford announced today that he will fund free health coverage for 48,000 uninsured, low-income South Dakotans.  The announcement comes in the wake of Republican Governor Dennis Daugaard’s continued refusal to accept $224 million in federal funding to cover the same group of citizens.

In recent years, Sanford has been lauded for donating large amounts of money to South Dakota health facilities, sports complexes, and other popular projects.   The high interest banker often has his projects named after him, such as Sanford Health™, Sanford Children’s™, Sanford Heart™,  Sanford Medical School™, Sanford Pentagon™, Sanford Sports Complex™, and Denny Sanford Premier Center™.

Sanford’s latest donation comes in the midst of a bitter political debate that has been intensifying in South Dakota for several years.

As part of the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA), sometimes called Obamacare, about 48,000 low income South Dakotans are eligible for Medicaid coverage.  By the year 2020, South Dakota was to have received a massive influx of $224 million due to this expansion of coverage.

Medicaid_ExpansionHowever Governor Daugaard has refused the $224 million to cover uninsured poor people, citing his  personal opposition to Obamacare and the cost of the expansion that would be paid by South Dakota.  The federal government is paying 100 percent of the total costs through 2016, and 90 percent after that.

The neighboring states of Iowa, North Dakota, and Minnesota are all expanding Medicaid coverage to uninsured citizens, while Nebraska, Montana and Wyoming are not.  States that are opting out of the program will leave over 5 million of the poorest Americans without basic health benefits, or shifting their health care costs to other citizens.

Under pressure from South Dakota physicians and 63% of South Dakotans who support the Medicaid expansion, Daugaard recently asked the federal government to cover a little over half of the eligible citizens, but deny coverage to the rest of eligible citizens. The federal government rejected Daugaard’s proposal, leaving all 48,000 South Dakotans without coverage.  The Legislature  refused to allow the Medicaid expansion question to be posed to South Dakota voters at the ballot box.

But Sanford stepped into the fray today, announcing that he is creating a new Medicaid-like health plan, which he is calling SanfordCare™.  Any South Dakota citizen who would have been eligible for the Obamacare expansion would be eligible for the free SandfordCare™ coverage, provided they agree to legally change their surnames to Sanford™.  Any children born while under the health coverage would also have to adopt the first name Denny™ or Denita™.

Note:  This post is, to the best of our knowledge, satire.  There is no SanfordCare proposal, but there are 48,000 South Dakotans being denied health coverage.

Franken Opponent McFadden Refuses To Confirm Own Existence

Posted on by

invisible_manSaint Paul, Minnesota — Minnesota U.S.  Senate candidate Mike McFadden held a news conference today to announce that he would be announcing nothing.

“Minnesota is great, and I’ll do lots of great stuff in the Senate to make it even greater,” said McFadden, to roaring applause from his supporters.  “Beyond that, I promise that I will not do wasteful ungreat things that keep Minnesota from becoming greater.”

Under questioning from reporters, the wealthy businessman running to replace U.S. Senator Al Franken refused to provide positions  on the national policy issues that are debated in the U.S. Senate.   For example, McFadden declined to state his position on the minimum wage, the Paycheck Fairness Act and a “personhood” anti-birth control measure.

MinnPost reporter Eric Black recently attempted to profile the stealth Senate candidate, but struggled to find anything to profile beyond the over $2 million the former businessman has raised from enthusiastic conservative donors.  Black characterized the McFadden record like this:

I’m not sure what the record is for seeking a seat in the U.S. Senate without disclosing issue positions, but McFadden, who declared his candidacy nine months ago, may be giving it a run.

There is no “issues” section on his campaign website. He skipped the first three opportunities to debate his Republican opponents for the nomination.  On Monday, he appeared at the fourth debate, but that one was closed to the press and public.

The McFadden campaign maintains that the candidate has taken many position stands, such as his desire to “name way more awesome things after Ronald Reagan” and “repeal and replace” the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA).

When pressed for details about what he would replace the ACA with, McFadden said that announcement would need to wait until he begins his six-year term in office.

“We will help, not hurt Americans,” McFadden  explained.

The campaign did release a 12-page single spaced list of things McFadden would rename after Ronald Reagan.

When asked to name political role models McFadden listed Ronald Reagan, several Reagan impersonators and Chauncey Gardiner.

“By standing for no one, and Mike is appealing to everyone,” said Saul Loes, a conservative political consultant advising the McFadden campaign. “He just might be the most brilliant politician of our generation, if he exists, which we are neither confirming nor denying.”

Note:  This post is satire.

What Does Ortman Really Think About Palin Endorsement?

Posted on by

Barack Obama’s favorable ratings have seen better days.  An average of polls compiled by Real Clear Politics (RCP) shows that an underwhelming 47% of Americans have a favorable view of the President.

This presents a challenge for incumbent Democratic U.S. Senator Al Franken, because Franken has been a supporter of the President’s efforts on health care reform, job creation packages, a minimum wage increase, ending the Middle East wars and other Obama initiatives.

So who does State Senator Julianne Ortman partner with to make her case to replace Franken?  Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, whose abysmal 37% favorability rating (RCP average of  recent polls) makes President Obama look like a rock star in comparison.

Palin, one of the Tea Party’s wackiest voices, laid it on thick for Senator Ortman:

“Let’s give voters a contrast this fall: a clown vs. a Mama Grizzly, an Obama 100 Percenter vs. a Blue Star Mom, a talker vs. a doer, and a liberal Obama rubber stamp legislator vs. a proven conservative fighter.”

While Senator Ortman said positive things about the Palin endorsement, her body language perhaps exposes more ambivalence.  This photo was featured on Governor Palin’s Facebook page.Palin_Ortman_birdFor the Republican primary, the Palin endorsement definitely helps Senator Ortman.  For the general election, the Palin endorsement is good news for Franken, not Ortman, because it frames the largely unknown Ortman up as a Palin-esque Tea Partier.

So, while I’m sure Senator Ortman’s bird escaped accidentally in this photo, you could hardly blame her if it didn’t.

MN Congressional Candidates Take Note: 6 of 10 Americans Want To Keep Obamacare

Posted on by

The reporting on Obamacare public opinion research has been consistently shallow, as I’ve noted for years.  Despite the many simplistic “Public Opposes Obamacare” stories and punditifications, a deeper dive into the polls shows that an overwhelming majority of Americans want to either keep the Affordable Care Act (ACA) as is, or improve it.

The latest Kaiser Family Health Foundation Tracking Poll, which was fielded prior to this week’s positive publicity about ACA insurance exchanges targets being met, finds that this trend is continuing.  Even after a pre-deadline deluge of anti-Obamacare advertising, Americans still oppose repealing the Affordable Care Act, by a huge 29% to 59% margin.  Independent voters, who will be so important in the upcoming mid-term elections, also overwhelmingly oppose the GOP’s repeal calls, by a 32% to 52% margin.

Survey__59_pct_want_to_keep_acaSo, nervous DFL congressional candidates, improvements to the ACA — a better exhange website, a more robust exchange call center, more exchange “navigators,” stronger enrollment incentives for young adults,  and/or a public insurance option — would be welcomed by voters.  But let your Republican opponents blather on about “repeal and replace” all they want, because it simply is not selling.

– Loveland

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

Are Vikings Whitewashing Bird Droppings Issue?

Posted on by

There are many big unanswered questions associated with the new stadium being constructed for the Minnesota Vikings.

  • How will we pay for our new sports palace if iPad gambling problems continue?
  • Will we be able to host a Super Bowl, so Johnny Manziel and the rest of the Vikings can enjoy home field advantage?
  • Will Andrew Zimmern’s Bizarre Foods be served at the new stadium (If so, I’m guessing polite Minnesotans will  call them “Different Foods,” so no one feels bad.)?

bird_poop_on_windshieldThose are important questions.  But I’m focused on something REALLY important:  How are we going to stop the world’s largest transparent roof from becoming the world’s largest collection of bird excrement?

I’m quite serious.  Think about it.  Your standard automobile windshield is about 15 square feet.  At that size, it is a bird shit magnet.  But, the saving grace is that your windshield is easily cleaned with a touch of a button, or at least with your feet planted firmly on the ground.

vikings_stadium_roofYour Vikings stadium transparent roof, on the other hand, will be 240,000 square feet, the largest such transparent roof in the world.  Local birds will have a target that will be difficult to miss.  And so far as I know, Zygi Wilf is not springing for a ginormous windshield wiper system.  Because of this, over time I’m concerned our transparent roof could end up as gray as the Metrodome roof.

Pioneer Press reporter Bob Sansavere asked about this almost a year ago, and was given a curt answer by the Vikings’ Lester Bagley.

“The ETFE (ethylene-tetraflouroethylene) product is self-cleaning.”

Blue skies, nothing but blue skies, according to Mr. Bagley.  Mr. Sansavere didn’t probe for details about that “self cleaning” claim, but I remain curious.   How exactly does “self cleaning” work?

  • Do plopping molecules disintegrate when encountering with ethylene-tetraflouroethylene molecules?
  • Is ETFE so darn slippery that bird poop immediately slides off of it? (In which case I have pedestrian-oriented follow-up questions.)
  • Are the Vikings planning to deploy something from Ronald Reagan’s strategic defense initiative (SDI) to protect the roof from sparrow-launched missiles?
  • Do we believe that local grackles will have so much reverence for the dazzling beauty of ETFE that they will voluntarily take their business elsewhere?
  • Can I get this miraculous bird shit-proof technology installed on my car and home?

Mr. Bagley’s “self cleaning” claim might very well be true. But since we taxpayers are buying about half a billion dollars worth of stock in the world’s biggest shrine to ethylene-tetraflouroethylene, I want to hear more.

– Loveland

Note:  This post also appeared in streets.mn and Minnpost.

MN GOPers Offer Bill To Insure More Families and Ban Preexisting Condition Exclusions

Posted on by

Saint Paul, Minnesota (April 1, 2014) —  Republicans legislators in the Minnesota House of Representatives today released detailed legislation that would extend health insurance to 489,000 uninsured Minnesotans, and guarantee that Minneostans will never again be denied health coverage because of a preexisting health condition.

“Democrats have put their detailed health care plan out there to be analyzed by Minnesota citizens, so we decided that we should develop our own detailed proposal,” said Minnesota House Minority Leader Kurt Daudt (R-Crown).

republican_alternative_to_obamacare_GingrichThe Democrats’ Affordable Care Act (ACA) has made it illegal for private insurance companies to deny coverage due to pre-existing health conditions, something that impacts many of the 2.3 million Minnesotans who have some type of pre-existing health condition, and others who could develop one in the future.

The ACA also successfully helped 95,000 of Minnesota’s most vulnerable citizens get efficiently covered in Medicaid, including about 12,000 uninsured Minnesotans whose medical expenses were being shifted to insured Minnesotans.  In addition, the ACA covers 35,000 Minnesota young adults, many of whom otherwise would have been uninsured, but now are able to stay on their parents’ health policy until age 26.  Finally, over 150,000 Minnesotans recently enrolled into health insurance plans via the MNsure online insurance selection and comparison tool, in part because the plans offered on MNsure carried the lowest premiums in the nation.

Despite those findings, Republicans gathered at a news conference at the State Capitol today to declare the Democratic effort a “train wreck,” and to release their detailed legislative alternative  They note that their legislation will achieve more results at a fraction of the cost of the ACA.

“We’re proud of our party’s health reform ideas, and have no problem setting our detailed proposal alongside the Democrats’ detailed proposal,” said Daubt.  “In fact, we have already asked for a non-partisan third party analysis of our legislation, so that Minnesotans can see precisely how our bill compares with the ACA in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and affordability.”

In other April 1 news, a large group of boars was reported to be flying through a brutal polar vortex over the frozen southeastern Michigan town of Hell.  The soaring swine seemed to be disoriented by a blinding morning sunrise on the western horizon.

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

Minimum Wage “Indexing”: DFL Political Marketing At It’s Worst

Posted on by

pay_raiseGetting an “annual pay raise” is pretty awesome, especially if you’re a minimum wage worker.   Fist pumpingly awesome even.  So is getting a pay “bump,” “bonus,” “boost” or “hike.”

But having your wage “indexed” for inflation is underwhelming and/or confusing.

When a politician has an opportunity to legitimately claim credit for a guaranteed annual pay raise, that’s political gold.  So why are Minnesota DFLers marching around the State Capitol continually yammering to Minnesotans about their desire to “index” the minimum wage?  After all, the outcome of indexing is an annual pay raise, unless there is deflation, which is relatively unusual in the United States.

So why not call the DFL’s proposal what ordinary people would call it, an “annual raise?”

“The DFL is fighting to increase the minimum wage increase now, and build-in an annual pay raise for years to come.”

Voters would understand that much better than the current language being used:

“The DFL is fighting to adjust the minimum wage, indexed to the rate of inflation.”

When most minimum wage recipients hear the term “index,” they don’t think “an annual raise.”  They think one of two things:   1) Huh? or 2) The  part of the book that everyone skips because it’s too boring.  Either way, no fist pumps.

Mere wordsmithing, you say?  Republicans invest heavily in wordsmithing, and it has proven very effective for them.  They hire consultants like Frank Luntz, the author of “Words That Work:  It’s Not What You Say, It’s What People Hear,” and many an Orwellian moment.   Luntz famously convinced  Republicans to shift from “inheritance taxes” to “death taxes.”  Luntz understood that “inheritance” sounds unearned and aristocratic to the masses, while “taxing death” sounds outrageously insensitive and unfair.  When Republican leaders followed Luntz’s advice, the level of support for inheritance taxes among non-wealthy citizens dramatically decreased.

But that’s not all.  Luntz convinced Republicans to march in lockstep from “oil drilling” to “energy exploration,” “health care reform” to “government takeover of health care,” and “corporations” to “job creators.” Luntz showed Republicans that words can work against you or for you.  Those seemingly minor shifts have helped Republicans win over many lightly engaged citizens.

So, my fellow liberals, what do you think the great political pied piper Luntz would have to say about Democratic politicians’ love affair with the term “indexing?”

“Indexing” is hardly the Democrats only jargon problem.  There is the coded term “single payer” instead of the instantly understandable “Medicare for all.”  There is the emphasis on the abstract move to “address the achievement gap” instead of on the more understandable push to  “fix failing schools.”  There is the sterile push for something called a “sustainable environment” instead of a push for something more tangible and visceral, such as “clean water, land and air.”

Ever-earnest Governor Dayton is trying to fix this through executive order.  The Plain Language Fact Sheet that he issued notes, plainly:

Using Plain Language to communicate will: 1) reduce confusion for citizens; 2) save time and resources; 3) improve customer service; and 4) make state government work better for the people it serves.

It will also improve DFLer’s chances in elections.  You go, Guv.

Republicans seem to be much more thoughtful and disciplined about campaign communications than Democrats.   Republicans will read Luntz’s talking points, and dutifully execute them day after day.  “Death tax, death tax, death tax.”  Meanwhile, self-serious Democrats  turn up their noses about what they regard as superficial “spin,” and cling to their beloved Wonkspeak to impress the think tankers.

Then, come Election Day, the Democrats wonder why voters don’t appreciate their accomplishments.  But as I watch the DFL speak in code about “indexing,” I don’t wonder.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was featured in Politics in Minnesota’s Best of the Blogs and MinnPost.