March 24-25, 2008
Mar 24 00:00 Talking Moderate, Voting Liberal: Melissa Hortman Mar 24 09:59 As Intellectually Dishonest As It Gets Mar 25 02:12 The Pinocchio Awards Mar 25 09:49 Profiles In Political Cowardice Mar 25 11:59 Media Holding Hillary to Account Mar 25 21:42 Can't Have That Happening
Talking Moderate, Voting Liberal: Melissa Hortman
I first became interested in Melissa Hortman's legislative history during the Transportation Bill veto override debate. Since then, I've learned alot about Rep. Hortman. When Margaret Anderson-Kelliher declared that the House DFL caucus was a "fiscally moderate caucus", many of us in the Right Blogosphere didn't accept her at her word. Today, I'd submit that Melissa Hortman is the poster child of that Kelliher quote.
In 15 months since Kelliher's quote, we've seen the DFL take an approach that's anything but moderate. Rep. Hortman has played a significant role in the DFL's immoderation, voting for all the major tax increases and attempted veto overrides.
This isn't a shocking new development, either, based on this article from February, 2006:
While campaigning for her seat in 2004, Rep. Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park, listened to several former Minnesota Finance commissioners complain about the state budget's volatile mood swings.Why does Rep. Hortman think that a bill that's truly "revenue neutral" will stop the budgetary roller coaster ride Minnesota has experienced? If it's truly revenue neutral, how does that help at all? I don't have proof of this but I strongly suspect that the bill isn't revenue neutral. Notice, too, that Rep. Hortman is solely focused on the revenue side of the budgetary equation. There isn't proof that she focused on the spending side of the equation.
The complaint, she's since decided, has merit. Since joining the House in 2005, Hortman has watched the state's budget bounce from deficit to surplus and back to deficit again. And Thursday, Finance Department officials will release the latest economic forecast that could show a general fund shortfall of as much as $1 billion.
"We definitely have been on a budget rollercoaster," Hortman said.
Hortman has introduced a bill that addresses a primary cause of that budget volatility: the state sales tax.
Reforming the tax is a favorite subject of both John Gunyou, finance commissioner in GOP Gov. Arne Carlson's administration, and Jay Kiedrowski, the same under DFL Gov. Rudy Perpich.
Hortman's bill would broaden the sales tax by including goods and services that aren't taxed. Her proposal would be "revenue neutral" because it would lower the 6.5 percent sales tax rate to 4.5 percent for purchases made after June 30.
That's hardly the only manifestation of her liberal views. HF 863 is more proof that Rep. Hortman is a liberal masquerading as a moderate. Here's the portion of the bill that should raise tons of red flags:
2.3 (b) The Pollution Control Agency shall adopt rules, as authorized under the federalWhat that language means is that Minnesota wouldn't control their emission standards. They'd turn that over to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which oversees California's emissions standards. As is my habit, I did a little digging into CARB. Here's what I found :
2.4Clean Air Act, United States Code, title 42, section 7507, to regulate emission standards
2.5of motor vehicles sold in this state. The rules:
2.6 (1) must be adopted under section 14.388, subdivision 1, clause (3);
2.7 (2) except as provided in clause (3), must be identical to and must incorporate by
2.8reference the California low emission vehicle regulations adopted by the California Air
2.9Resources Board under the California Code of Regulations, title 13;
2.10 (3) must not include the zero emission vehicle standards contained in California
2.11Code of Regulations, title 13, section 1962;
2.12 (4) the 15-year or 150,000-mile extended warranty specified in California Code of
2.13Regulations, title 13, section 1962, for partial zero emission vehicles shall not be included
2.14as a requirement of the rules provided that partial zero emission vehicles delivered for
2.15sale to Minnesota are equipped with the same quality components as partial zero emission
2.16vehicles supplied to areas where the full 15-year or 150,000-mile warranty remains in
2.17effect. This section does not amend the requirements of California Code of Regulations,
2.18title 13, section 1962, that indicate the warranty period for a zero emission energy storage
2.19device used for traction power will be ten years; and
2.20 (5) must be amended as necessary in a timely fashion to minimize the time during
2.21which Minnesota's rules are not identical with California's regulations, as required under
2.22United States Code, title 42, section 7507. Amendments under this clause must be made
2.23under section 14.388, subdivision 1, clause (3).
2.24Any portion of California's regulations requiring a federal waiver under the Clean
2.25Air Act in order to become effective may not be enforced in Minnesota unless and until
2.26California receives the requisite federal waiver.
The Air Resources Board (Board) consists of 11 members appointed by the Governor with the consent of the Senate. All members serve "at the pleasure" of the Governor. The Board members serve part time, except the Chairperson, who serves full time.One of the things Rep. Hortman likely doesn't want people to know is that the bill requires the MPCA to adopt emissions standards that "must be identical to and must incorporate by reference" California's emissions regulations and that it requires the MPCA to adopt California's future regulations as well. I'd love hearing why Rep. Hortman would cede this much responsibility and jurisdiction to an unaccountable California regulatory commission .
Members must meet qualifications specified in the law. Five members must be chosen from the boards of local air quality management districts:
One Each from the:
Three other members fill specific categories:
- San Diego Air Pollution Control District
- San Francisco Bay Area Air Quality Management District
- San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District
- South Coast Air Quality Management District (Greater Los Angeles Region)
- and One from Any Other District.
One of the three remaining members must have expertise in air pollution control, or must meet the qualifications of one of the three categories mentioned above. The remaining two members are public members.
- One must have expertise in automotive engineering or a closely related field.
- One must have expertise in science, agriculture, or law.
- One must be a physician and surgeon, or health effects expert.
I'd further love hearing Rep. Hortman explain why she thinks the MPCA isn't capable of carrying out its regulatory responsibilities. Does Rep. Hortman think that the MPCA won't impose strict enough rules? Rep. Hortman's constituents should ask her that the next time she holds a townhall meeting.
Here's some other things that Rep. Hortman isn't telling her constituents:
California's emissions standards don't support Minnesota's commitment to E85 because manufacturers would have to provide proof that that the vehicles are operating exclusively on E85.
Rep. Hortman also isn't highlighting the fact that the only way to meet California's emission standards is by all but eliminating trucks, minivans and SUV's from showroom floors. Minnesota currently sells more trucks than cars by a 55% to 45% margin.
As scary as that is, it gets worse. Here's what Section 2 says:
ADOPTION .It isn't reasonable to make these regulations mandatory in just 3 years. Reasonable legislators wouldn't push for such harsh standards that quickly. I'd submit that that's proof that Rep. Hortman isn't a reasonable legislator.
4.17 The rules under section 1 must be adopted and made effective by September 30,
4.18 2008, and shall be effective for motor vehicles with a model year of 2012 and later .
4.19 EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective the day following final enactment.
Originally posted Monday, March 24, 2008, revised 27-Oct 7:15 AM
No comments.
As Intellectually Dishonest As It Gets
Silvestre Reyes' dishonesty is showing. Here's where Rep. Reyes goes wrong in his March 20th Strib op-ed :
As the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, I am committed to taking this fight to the terrorists, but I remain convinced that we can do that while stopping this administration, or any administration, from conducting warrantless spying on Americans. Our responsibility includes not only the safety of the American people but also the safety and sanctity of the American Constitution. We must protect both.Rep. Reyes is spinning this beyond acceptable levels. He's writing about Rep. Michele Bachmann's op-ed about the expiration of the FISA reform bill known as the Protect America Act (PAA). In the law that expired, FISA was updated temporarily. It expired after 6 months.
Everyone who knows anything about intelligence gathering knows that FISA deals only with foreign surveillance, hence the name Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. It has nothing to do with surveilling Americans.
Let's first examine why the PAA was enacted. A FISA Appellate Court judge ruled that foreign communications that passed through an American telecommunications switch needed a warrant because it was deemed a domestic communication. In this judge's mind, it didn't matter that the sender and recipient weren't Americans. It didn't even matter that neither the sender or recipient weren't even in the United States. All that mattered was that the communication passed through an American switch.
DNI Chairman Mike McConnell testified to this in Congress. He repeated that information to FNS's Chris Wallace :
Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell recently told Fox News Channel's Chris Wallace that by summer 2007, "We were in extremis, because we had lost,about two-thirds of our [surveillance] capability."Director McConnell testified that he was writing out warrants for known terrorists because of the FISA ruling.
In other words, Rep. Reyes is spinning this when he says that he's "convinced that we can do that while stopping this administration" from "conducting warrantless spying on Americans." Rep. Reyes should be ashamed of himself for implying that this has anything directly to do with domestic intelligence gathering. the only way it would affect domestic intelligence gathering is if the NSA or CIA spots the name of an American citizen or "person". If they spot someone living in the United States, then they get a warrant from a court to surveil them.
The only issue left to resolve on the legislation is whether they'll grant retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies that assisted in this effort. Here's how Rep. Reyes opens his op-ed:
A March 14 article by Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., made several errors in decrying House inaction on electronic surveillance legislation.That isn't totally accurate. The bill didn't represent a "which represents a collaborative effort between the House and Senate" because the House bill didn't include retroactive immunity to the telecommunication companies.
First, on the very day her note was published, the House passed legislation that would grant new authority for electronic surveillance. This bill, which represents a collaborative effort between the House and Senate, would give intelligence agencies stronger tools to track terrorist communications while preserving important constitutional rights for Americans.
Two other things that Rep. Reyes isn't mentioning is that the Senate bill passed by a 68-29 margin, a truly bipartisan effort, and that the Senate bill wouldn't be considered because it would pass with similar bipartisan support.
Rep. Reyes is simply doing Speaker Pelosi's bidding and doing a lousy job of it at that. Here's what Sen. Kit Bond, Rep. Peter Hoekstra and Rep. Lamar Smith said in their Washington Post op-ed about the lapsing of the PAA:
We are less safe today and will remain so until Congress clears up the legal uncertainty for companies that assist in collecting intelligence for the government, and until it gives explicit permission to our intelligence agencies to intercept, without a warrant, foreign communications that pass through the U.S. Here's why:Let's remember Rep. Reyes' accusation against Michele Bachmann:
- Intercepting terrorist communications requires the cooperation of our telecommunications companies. They're already being sued for having cooperated with the government after 9/11. So without explicit protection for future actions (and civil liability protection for the help they provided in the past), those companies critical to collecting actionable intelligence could be sidelined in the fight.
It has already happened, briefly. "[W]e have lost intelligence information this past week as a direct result of the uncertainty created by Congress' failure to act," Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and Attorney General Michael Mukasey wrote in a letter dated Feb. 22 to Mr. Reyes, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
- The old FISA law does not adequately protect the U.S., which is why it was revised by the Protect America Act last summer. The problem is that, although it has a few work-around-provisions, such as allowing intelligence agencies to conduct surveillance for up to 72 hours without a warrant, FISA ultimately requires those agencies to jump through too many legal hurdles. Those include the Fourth Amendment's "probable cause" requirements, protections never intended for suspected terrorists' communications that are routed through the U.S.
Based on the Washington Post op-ed and Director McConnell's testimony, Rep. Reyes is just plain wrong. The expiration of the PAA has degraded the nation's intelligence gathering capabilities. Reyes can cite the administration's retraction all he wants but the facts are that McConnell's team was writing out warrant applications for known terrorists.Second, the expiration of the so-called "Protect America Act" (PAA) has not degraded our nation's intelligence collection capability. Bachmann chose to quote the director of national intelligence in his Feb. 5 testimony to support her argument, but on Feb. 23 the administration had to issue a retraction of those statements, stating that the government is now getting full cooperation from telecommunications companies and that the authorities of the PAA remain in full effect.
I find it troubling that the congresswoman chose to use a subsequently retracted statement in lobbying on a matter of such importance.
It's time that the House stopped their charade. It's time that they stopped spinning their irresponsible behavior. It's time that they passed the Senate bill so that we're fighting the terrorist with everything we've got in our arsenal rather than fighting them with one arm tied behind our back.
Posted Monday, March 24, 2008 10:16 AM
No comments.
The Pinocchio Awards
Hillary's description of her trip into war-torn Bosnia has earned her 4 Pinocchios from the Washington Post . Thanks to her telling whoppers, we've now established a new standard previously unattained by major party presidential candidates. The finalists for the Democratic nomination have both bene caught lying about something important within a month of each other. Here's what's touching off the firestorm:
Clinton insisted, "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."Here's the YouTube video that argues against Sen. Clinton:
I know that I've got hearing problems and my eyesight ain't what it used to be but I didn't hear any sniper fire and I'm certain that Hillary, Chelsea and company weren't dodging bullets as they left the helicopter.
Let's remember that it was only a week ago Friday that Obama denied hearing Pastor J-Wright's incendiary sermons, only to admit last Tuesday that he had heard some of them.
If Sen. McCain were to write the perfect script for his campaign, I don't think he'd write it much different than this. His primary function is to inject himself into the headlines often enough to remind people that he's the adult in the race and that he's a statesman. Then he steps off center stage, raises a bunch of money and watches Hillary and Obama beat each other up while spending millions of dollars against each other.
There's a few things that are undeniable:
- Hillary wasn't the model of virtue that Obama started off as;
- Obama isn't the model of virtue that he started off as and
- John McCain is the beneficiary of the first two undeniable facts.
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2008 2:14 AM
No comments.
Profiles In Political Cowardice
The Forest Lake school system caved to Democratic pressure by cancelling today's event by Vets for Freedom. Here's what you need to know about this disgraceful decision:
Steve Massey, the school principal, said the decision to cancel was prompted by concerns that the event was becoming political rather than educational and therefore was not suitable for a public school.Here's more on why the decision was made:
He said the school had received several phone calls from parents and others, some of whom indicated that they may stage a protest if the event took place.
"The event was structured to be an academic classroom discussion around military service. We thought we'd provide an opportunity for kids to learn about service in the context of our history classes," Massey said. "As the day progressed, it became clear that this was becoming a political event...which would be inappropriate in a public setting.
"We decided to cancel," Massey said. Organizers of the National Heroes Tour then scrambled to relocate the event to the American Legion building in Forest Lake. The visit, which U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Stillwater, had been scheduled to attend, is sponsored by Vets for Freedom, a national organization run by Pete Hegseth, a 1999 graduate of Forest Lake Area High School who served with the 101st Airborne in Iraq in 2005-06.
At "Democratic Underground Forums," there was an announcement of a press conference by various unidentified groups opposing the Vets for Freedom appearance. The announcement exhorted "Veterans for Peace" to oppose the appearance and listed contact info for Massey; school board president Bill Bresin, and the Forest Lake Area Schools district office. The post expressed "outrage" that Vets for Freedom was going to meet with students to "indoctrinate them on the joys of war."By cancelling the event, Mssrs. Bresin and Massey just put themselves in the middle of a political firestorm.
Question: Were Mssrs. Bresin and Massey being profiles in cowardice or were they just agreeing with their liberal allies? Or was it a little of both?
The word now is spreading like wildfire, with the the event taking a much higher profile because of their decision. What was going to be a nonpartisan event has just turned into political theater.
I suspect that the evening news will focus on the cancellation of the event. Rest assured that this blog and others in the True North network of blogs will have much, much more on this breaking story. There's already three posts up on TN on this event. Make LFR and the True North network of blogs your one stop shopping center for continuing updates.
UPDATE: Drudge linked to the Strib article. Jim at Gateway Pundit , Uncle Jimbo at Blackfive and Michelle Malkin have posted about this profile in political cowardice, too .
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2008 10:23 AM
Comment 1 by Political Muse at 25-Mar-08 10:57 AM
I am curious, what might have been your response if a veteran organization such as Vote Vets, Iraq Veterans Against the War, or some other anti-war organization tried to speak at the school?
Oh the outrage we would see from the forces on the right! And if you got them to change their venue, you would herald that as success.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 25-Mar-08 11:15 AM
Eric, I would've fought for their right to free speech. I would've then fought for the right for anti-anti-war protesters to protest the event.
My beef was that the school administration caved to DU activists. Their reason was purely political. VFF can't make political speeches because they'd have their IRS exception revoked.
Comment 3 by tbogg at 25-Mar-08 01:49 PM
"Rest assured that this blog and others in the True North network of blogs will have much, much more on this breaking story."
A grateful nation holds its breath while quivering with anticipation.
Comment 4 by Cory at 25-Mar-08 03:33 PM
See what this principal is really like... http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2008/03/forest-lake-pri.html
Media Holding Hillary to Account
According to this article in Hill Magazine, Team Hillary is battening down the hatches following the firestorm involving Hillary's claim that she dodged sniper bullets on her trip to Bosnia. Here's the money quote from their article:
"We've said all we're going to say on that," said Deputy Communications Director Phil Singer on a Tuesday morning conference call with reporters.Team Obama jumped all over this:
The Obama campaign seized on the story when it was splashed across the CBS website Monday, with spokesman Tommy Vietor saying it is "part of a troubling pattern of Sen. Clinton inflating her foreign policy experience."It isn't surprising to conservatives that Hillary has a credibility gap. In fact, Rush is asking why we think it's news that a Clinton got caught lying. I think it's only news because the media isn't letting Hillary get away with telling this lie.
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2008 12:35 PM
No comments.
Can't Have That Happening
I've talked briefly with Mr. Hegseth before Gen. Petraeus' testimony last fall. He honorably served his nation in Iraq, fighting to give Iraqis the same basic freedoms we take for granted here. Instead of allowing VFF to give a legitimate presentation about military life, Principal Massey instead chose censorship over enlightenment. He chose to be a weenie instead of standing up for free speech. It obviously didn't dawn on Principal Massey that the VFF rally and ensuing protest by anti-war protesters would've provided a great lesson on the First Amendment to his students.
Had these anti-war protesters just staged a protest, I would've been fine with that. I would've ridiculed them for their beliefs but I would've defended their constitutional rights to the Nth degree. Instead of staging a protest, though, these unidentified anti-war groups pressured Principal Massey into cancelling the event. That's censorship, which, unfortunately, isn't uncommon within the anti-war movement.
Their forcing the event's cancellation is proof of their fascist tendencies. Before anyone gets upset by the use of that term, here's the definition I'm referring to:
A reactionary or dictatorial person.Confident people don't resort to that type of fascism or censorship. These anti-war punks are cowering cowards who don't even have the guts to identify themselves. This bunch of punks deserve all the ridicule we can heap on them. What they did today wasn't principled. It was fascistic. That's the mark of a coward.
We can't have that happening.
UPDATE: Ed Morrissey has a post up about the students going to the American Legion post to hear VFF's speakers.
UPDATE II: Janet has a great post up about the evening VFF event. Make sure & check out her earlier post , too.
Originally posted Tuesday, March 25, 2008, revised 26-Mar 3:53 AM
Comment 1 by Mark Podzimek at 26-Mar-08 08:28 AM
I am glad to see that someone was covering this. Appearently the local news felt it was not important enough. I am a retired veteran, who has been to Iraq three seperate times for a total of twenty months.
The cancellation of the VFF event by the FLHS was one more in a string of Anti-War censorship activities. This is a painful example of where they would like this country to be heading.
I would like to take a group of these anti-war punks and pansies to Iraq, and show them what our military has done. We could leave out the IED's and sniper fire we have to deal with. The trip would only be a week or so at the most, not the whole year away from the families we love so much. Just to show them the smiles on the faces of the free Iraqi's, the schools and hospitals that we have reconstructed, stocked and opened.
Maybe one of these pansies would like to stand up and fight for their right to free speach they so dearly love.
I can only assume by not allowing the VFF into the FLHS, that all Anti-War propaganda, democratic bumper stickers and any other sign of free speach has been removed from the school.
Identify these punks and bring them out from under the rock where they live.
Thank you for allowing me to voice my opinion in a free and democratic forum!
Comment 2 by Lady Logician at 26-Mar-08 08:55 AM
Mr. Podzimek - first and foremost thanks for your service. My husband is former US Army and while he served in peacetime I still understand and appreciate the sacrifice of our servicemen/women and their families.
Sadly I don't think any amount of time in theater would change the minds of these small minded people. They are basing their actions, not on rational thought, but on emotion and nothing will change what they "feel".
This all started with a posting of a letter from Karl Bremer of STILLWATER on the website Democratic Underground. Mr. Bremer is well known by Minneapolis bloggers as "Michele Bachman's stalker". I'll be posting on this a little later at my "home".
LL
Comment 3 by Doug at 27-Mar-08 09:51 AM
You did notice that the VFF group planned a media event in the parking lot right? As I understand it, the group rolled a tank onto the school property. Yup, just a small intimate discussion about military experience. And, you were aware that Representative Michele Bachmann was scheduled to be in attendance right?
Pete Hegseth insisted this was NOT a political event but by involving Bachmann and Bob Dettmer, this is exactly what it was. To play innocent and try to pass this off as anything other than a political media event is intellectually dishonest.
This was another photo op for a Representative who has done ZERO public constituent service unless it's under the cover of groups like the VFF.
