In 2012, the dominant issue in the Minnesota Legislature was the debate about public subsidies for the Vikings Stadium. No issue was more emotionally charged. No issue was more polarizing. No issue was more heavily covered in the news.
So just a few months later, why is this marquee legislative issue such an insignificant factor in the campaign for control of the Minnesota Legislature? After all, based on last year’s debate, you might expect that it would be The Issue out on the stump.
But I’m not seeing it. The issue hasn’t been raised once in any of the many political direct mail pieces that have clogged my mailbox, or cable TV ads flooding my living room. Moreover, I Googled “Vikings Stadium and election,” and found no stories where the mother of all legislative Issues was playing a prominent role out on the political hustings.
How about stadium champions like Senator Julie Rosen (R-Fairmont)? Surely she must be getting pummeled for championing the Vikings’ cause. Well, the Mankato Free Press reports that Rosen’s opponent Paul Marquardt isn’t making it an issue:
Marquardt isn’t critical of the stadium bill (other than Rosen’s failure to get a more iron-clad guarantee that the Vikings would keep their training camp in Mankato). His primary complaint isn’t even with Rosen herself as much as with the Republican majority she supports.
“They got hung up on constitutional amendments that were just a complete waste of time and taxpayer money,” said Marquardt, a retired union plumber. “… They created no jobs. And on top of that, we lost our homestead credit.”
On the other side of the aisle, DFL Senator Leroy Stumpf (DFL-Plummer) has no problem bragging to the St. James News about the economic development benefits of the stadium:
“We also have a good commitment on the part of Governor Dayton to create jobs by using the state’s bonding capacity for smart and strategic investments such as the Viking Stadium…”
Mostly, the issue seems to be missing from campaign debates. When it does come up, it is much more low key than it was during the State Capitol debate.
So, why the has the Vikings stadium debate lost its political edge?
REPORTERS MOVED ON AND POLS FOLLOWED. During the session, the Vikings stadium issue was the ultimate “water cooler issue,” an issue that almost all Minnesotans could and did discuss in their social spheres. For that reason, the news media, looking to give the masses what they craved, covered the issue like none other. Reporters stoked the fire almost daily. But now that the issue has been resolved, reporters have dropped the issue cold and moved onto new hot button issues, principally the gay marriage ban and voter restriction constitutional amendments. If reporters are interested at all these days, their interest is limited to whether the stadium roof will be retractable, and how many toilets it will house. Politicians craft their messaging around what reporters will cover, and reporters have moved on. As a result, the politicians have also largely moved on.
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT NEUTRALIZES PARTISAN ATTACKS. Because both DFLers and Republicans supported stadium bill, the political operatives who shape legislative campaign messaging have to be cautious about how they play this issue. Neither party can have a coordinated party-based attack on subsidies, because valued members of both parties supported the subsidies. As a result, the stadium subsidy issue takes a back seat to issues where the parties can have coordinated messaging, such as taxes, jobs, and education.
THE ISSUE HASN’T BEEN POLITICALLY POTENT IN THE PAST. Finally, this issue doesn’t have a history of providing a political payoff. Like the Vikings, the Minnesota Twins also spent a decade in a bitter debate over ballpark subsidies. But after the Twins debate ended, I am not aware of a single politician who lost their position over the issue. If the Twins ballpark subsidy vote had led to a massive political bloodletting, you can bet that the Vikings vote would be a major topic in the 2012 debate. But it didn’t, so it isn’t.
Whatever the reasons, this much is clear: The Vikings stadium debate is ending the way all too many Vikings seasons have ended, in stone cold silence.
– Loveland
Note: This post was also featured in Politics in Minnesota’s Best of the Blogs.