December 5-13, 2012
Dec 05 02:15 SCSU Faculty Association question student transcripts Dec 05 11:52 Rep. Ellison admits Obamanomics isn't working Dec 07 06:32 Boehner's communications breakdown Dec 07 07:17 Candidates emerge for MnDOT/Department of Light Rail Subsidies Dec 11 01:38 Sen. Bakk of Edina, Woodbury, Burnsville and Apple Valley Dec 08 06:54 Twin Cities DFL kills mining again, Part II Dec 10 06:26 Twin Cities DFL kills mining again, Part II Dec 12 03:35 Retiring Rep. Rukavina: still fighting for the Iron Range Dec 13 05:04 Twin Cities DFL kills mining again, Part III
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
SCSU Faculty Association question student transcripts
According to the minutes of the October 18 Meet and Confer meeting at St. Cloud State, the SCSU Faculty Association is questioning what happened with a number of student transcripts without the faculty's consent:
So officially what we would like to do is have data for FY07 through 12 of each semester and summer session the number of late withdrawals that are signed off after and the number of late withdrawals that faculty were not involved in. I saw three in one day in my department where the faculty were not consulted last spring and so I know its happening. Perhaps an even more concerning issue of the faculty is the number of transcript, and I don't know a way to describe it but I am going to use alterations where students are removed from being listed as having been enrolled.
It's difficult to picture a situation where a student disappears from a university's enrollment list. It's more difficult to picture a situation where a student and his/her grades disappear. As difficult as that appears to be, that's what appears to have happened at SCSU.
As disturbing as that is, it apparently isn't an isolated incident:
We had discussions about late withdrawals and I provided some information about some late withdrawals that when you read them you almost laugh. It's unfortunate that they are getting withdrawals and faculty don't even see that, don't even get to sign off and so somehow the process isn't being followed...
The fact that this isn't the first discussion about late withdrawals between the SCSU Faculty Association and the administration is troubling enough. The fact that it wasn't solved the first time adds to the administration's troubles. The administration's response is questionable:
Admin: The sense that we haven't shared information is not correct; we have shared information on this in the past. It is true that we've also agreed that we can share that information with you. I've directed folks that make the decision that once the decision is made and if there is any change in the transcript that should be conveyed to the dean of the school/college within which that course resides and to the instructor who was in charge of that course. So we will do that.
That's difficult to believe considering this response from the Faculty Association:
We have agreed to processes at least twice that I can remember. The last time was when Mitch was in your office and to get yearly reporting of late withdrawals and late withdrawals without faculty input and we got that information. I think that's one of the things that just ought to come out to us all the time, every year. The other piece of it is that it's difficult to do some things like helping with student success, some things like doing accurate assessment if people disappear from our records and we don't have that information in our records anymore or if we learn for example that, and this is kind of an odd example I suppose, you don't know that a student has taken a course three times because there is no record of it and the student is in there for the fourth time and you're trying to figure out a way to help that student be successful and yet you're blindsided by this lack of information.
Let's summarize:
- The Faculty Association noticed students who had gotten late withdrawals from classes that the faculty hadn't signed off on.
- The Faculty Association raised this issue with the administration at least once before.
- The Faculty Association and the administration agreed to a process to deal with this type of situation.
- Though they had reached an agreement on the process, the process wasn't followed.
As bad as that is, it gets worse:
Admin: That goes to the question also of support structures for student success and I agree and we are at least taking some steps in that direction with MAPWORKs, with other areas where we keep track not only via transcript which I think is after the event but while the students are in the classes.
FA: So if there was a withdrawal that faculty were not aware of and if the person was literally taken out of a course afterwards would that show up in MAPWORKs?
Admin: That probably won't show up in MAPWORKs.
It's apparent that the administration tried presenting MAPWORKs as a solution. It's equally apparent that the Faculty Association noticed that MAPWORKs isn't a solution, which the administration quickly admitted. The question that remains is why the administration would talk about MAPWORKs as a solution to the problem.
This is how potentially explosive this situation is:
In that spirit I'm hoping that we have shared governance, the curriculum is the primary responsibility of the faculty and the grades we trust you to maintain the integrity of them and while there are legitimate reasons for altering the transcripts and such we really do think that it would be a good thing for you to bring us into this process and not assert the management right that we can do whatever we want because I guarantee you the ill that you don't know is much, much, much worse the ill that you know. I know this is something the faculty will revolt over.
The thought that the faculty would revolt if the administration doesn't involve them in this process is understandable. The faculty take their job of grading students seriously. The thought that the administration might keep the faculty in the dark about how students' transcripts are getting altered without the professor signing off on the alteration is troubling.
SCSU better clean this situation up quickly. That said, I can't say that there isn't more to this than what we've learned thus far. If there's more, that's trouble for this administration.
Follow this link for more on this subject.
Tags: SCSU , Administration , Transcripts , Professors , Students , Late Withdrawals , Secrecy , Unions , Accountability
Posted Wednesday, December 5, 2012 2:15 AM
Comment 1 by Jethro at 06-Dec-12 09:22 AM
What on God's green Earth is going on at SCSU? Are there any checks & balances or is this place a free for all for corruption? Perhaps all taxpayer funding should be cut until accountability is restored.
Rep. Ellison admits Obamanomics isn't working
I don't think Rep. Keith Ellison understood that he admitted that President Obama's policies aren't working but that's what he admitted in saying this:
The middle class has already been forced to get by with less. The wealthiest 2% of Americans have continued to see their income rise as middle-class wages remained stagnant.
Actually, Rep. Ellison is lying or ill-informed when he says that middle-class wages have remained stagnant. They've actually dropped by $4,300 since President Obama took office. He's right that "the middle class has been forced to get by with less."
Thanks to President Obama's counterproductive economic policies, families are paying higher electric bills, higher gas prices while paying more for groceries. Meanwhile, President Obama's policies have led to higher unemployment and shrinking wages.
The latest proposal by Republicans fails to meet the basic test of fairness. Over the past two years, Republicans have forced cuts of more than $1.7 trillion for vital investments such as helping children get a college education and helping seniors heat their homes. But they have refused to ask the wealthy to contribute even a little more.
Rep. Ellison needs a refresher course on spinning. Republicans haven't cut anything. They've cut the projected rate of spending growth a little but they haven't cut spending. Only progressives think that slowing the rate of future spending from unprecedented levels is a destructive cut that's sure to wipe out the middle class.
Shame on Rep. Ellison for peddling that crap. President Obama's EPA has led to the closing of 100 coal-fired power plants. President Obama's loans to the rich fatcats who were his biggest campaign bundlers in 2008 was disgusting enough. That they got these loans right before going bankrupt and laying off thousands of factory workers.
Has Rep. Ellison criticized President Obama for destroying the lives of those middle class families while giving Obama's fatcats billions of dollars in taxpayer money? No, he hasn't.
Might Rep. Ellison's definition of fairness be subject to situational modifications? I can't rule that out.
Unfortunately, the Republican plan doesn't even touch Americans' most immediate concern: creating good jobs. It's time to focus on fairness. The Republican plan fails that test.
Rep. Ellison voted for the biggest job-killing legislation in U.S. history when he voted for the ACA. As a direct result of the ACA, workers are getting cut from full-time to part-time status. Wages are dropping. Other companies are laying hundreds of people off.
That Rep. Ellison has the audacity to say Republican plans won't create good-paying jobs is testament to his willingness to criticize those he disagrees with based on his assumptions. What's worse is that Rep. Ellison has repeatedly proven that he isn't willing to criticize policies that he voted for even if it's proven that they hurt the economy.
Rep. Ellison's worldview is skewed because he's viewing it through rose-colored glasses.
UPDATE: Welcome Hotair followers. After you read this article, make the time to read this article about a major breaking scandal on a college campus.
Tags: Keith Ellison , ACA , Middle Class Squeeze , Gas Prices , "Electric Bills , Groceries , President Obama , Bundlers , Solyndra , Bankruptcies , Unemployment , Deficits , Taxes , Fairness , Democrats
Posted Wednesday, December 5, 2012 12:24 PM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 05-Dec-12 02:28 PM
So how exactly does increasing taxes on the rich create jobs? How does increasing taxes on the rich start to balance the budget? Increasing tax will do neither. The rich already pay their fair share and the fair share of the 50% who don't pay anything at all.
How about we make those who pay nothing and receive so much from the govenrment actually pay for some of what they receive? These people need to have skin in the game as crazy Joe said. I mean it is patriotic to pay taxes, isn't it?
One thing I am glad to hear is that Obama is making job creation his number one priority. Well after raising taxes, increasing the debt ceiling, funding more green projects, bombing Iran, etc. This guy hasn't a clue.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 05-Dec-12 03:56 PM
Keith:
I hate to tell you the budget needs real cuts of something like $1.113 trillion dollars if you take into account Obama's tax increase on the rich. Are you going to propose those cuts.
I've cut back on my cable, on the number of movies I go to, I eat less in food than a single person on food stamps, etc. Where has government really cut their spending?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by eric z at 07-Dec-12 05:18 PM
ACA will only be a stop-gap. The only thing that can work, and ultimately must prevail, is single payer. Then the single payer incentive to police the abuses of the medical-industrial complex shall play full effect.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 08-Dec-12 07:35 AM
Eric, is it that you think people are too stupid to make their own health care decisions? Or is it that you think only government is capable of making the right decisions about a person's health? Or do you think only government bureaucrats, not patients acting on advice from their physicians, will make the right decisions?
Single-payer changes forever the doctor-patient relationship by rendering it moot. The IPAB will tell people what health care they can get when they're senior citizens because (this is written into the ACA) the types of care available to seniors is based on QALYs, aka Quality-Adjusted Life Years. It's a mathematical formula. That's part of the ACA.
Already, doctors are going to a different type of single-payer. They're dropping Medicare & going to cash-only patients. If the law changes to prohibit that, which would happen with your type of single-payer, they'll simply quit practicing. How's that going to help the Baby Boomers start entering their greatest use years? Do you really hate Baby Boomers that much that you'd intentionally create significant doctor shortages when they need the most care?
Going to gov't-run single-payer cuts doctor pay, which eliminates the incentive to become a doctor. And no, gov't-run single-payer isn't more efficient. I've talked with people who run clinics about this. They've told me, & I've verified this, that they just hide the costs.
When a clinic does a referral, that isn't counted as part of patient care. It's counted, properly, as overhead. Using the gov't accounting scam, that's counted as patient care, which it isn't. It's purely a business transaction. That isn't patient care.
Comment 4 by eric z at 08-Dec-12 11:06 AM
Gary, UnitedHealth bureaucrats are heartless bean counters intent on profiting from sickness, disease, and death. Ditto, big Pharma.
Do I think government could do better then these heartless bureaucrats, in their cold quota setting meanness, yes, I do think that.
Will the best of efforts be perverted by the lobbying of the wealthy in control of the health of the rest of us, that is the status quo? Probably it will continue, people being people, but at some point the revolution will be blogged, and the Hemsleys will be thrown under the bus. In my lifetime? Unlikely. Ultimately? I expect so. I certainly hope so.
As long as politicians are bought and sold - I am surprised there is not a futures market on politicians, of both parties - as long as that holds, we will see an America less than what it could be.
But those dealing in that commodity, bought and sold politicians, are the 1%. It is a club that neither you, Gary, nor I belong to. One I do not seek out.
Comment 5 by walter hanson at 08-Dec-12 05:09 PM
Eric:
Let me use a different type of government regulation to make the point you're ignoring. For the record I work in a government office. This is an unique type of office in the nation. We do stuff like drivers licenses, birth certificates, passports, and other things.
When the state congressional delegation got created the Minneapolis passport agency it has created major headaches for our unique type of office. Some negative things:
* We had to stop taking any application where the person was going to get a first time state ID card or permit (even though we never made the card or could officially put it into the state drivers license system).
* We had created a process to create the checks that the federal government wanted on each passport application (by the way the government approved the process) so customers could pay for their passports with cash or credit card. The government won't let us do that anymore.
* If you come into our office and you're waiting longer then other people who come into our office there is a reason related to passports. Passports have ordered us that if an employee lets call her Amy does passport applications she can't call numbers involving drivers licenses or vital records. At the same time we have employees like Kyle which do drivers licenses transactions or birth certificates that aren't allowed to touch passport applications.
And that is just the tip of the ice berg of their requlations. By the way at great inconvience to the public we might have to stop doing passports totally because of their regulations.
So you're lying when you think government regulation on health care won't affect your care, your costs, or your ability to control your own health care.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Boehner's communications breakdown
John Boehner is failing. He's playing President Obama's game on President Obama's court. He's prosecuting the wrong case. Rather than discussing the terms of the fiscal cliff debate, Speaker Boehner should be talking about why Republicans' pro-growth tax policies are America's only hope for a variety of Obama-created ills.
First, Speaker Boehner should highlight the fact that President Clinton's high tax rates didn't trigger the great economy. He should remind the nation that it was Newt's capital gains tax cuts that sent the economy into high gear. Prior to those tax cuts, the economy was doing ok. After cutting the capital gains tax, growth exploded.
Another thing that Speaker Boehner must do is remind people that Republicans' insisting on balancing the federal budget helped strengthen the dollar, which led to a dramatic shrinking of America's trade deficit. That especially affected gas prices.
Third, Speaker Boehner should shout from the rooftops that revenues during the Bush tax cuts were significantly bigger than revenues are today. If Speaker Boehner asked President Obama why he's insisting on anti-growth policies that tamp the economy down rather than implementing new pro-growth policies that strengthen the economy, President Obama might well blow a gasket.
This is the debate we should start. This is the debate President Obama can't win. This is the conversation that would expose President Obama's motivation for imposing higher tax rates.
Rather than the pattern of proposal-counterproposal, then a counter offer to the counterproposal, with each side publicly stating that the other side needs to put forth a serious proposal, Speaker Boehner should ditch that pattern, especially the taunting language.
Instead, Speaker Boehner, followed by every Republican in Congress talking with their local newspapers and TV outlets about how cutting spending is what's fair to taxpayers and how reforming the tax code, highlighted by fewer deductions and lower tax rates, would strengthen the economy.
Highlight the fact that this was the real reason why the economy was strong during the Clinton administration. Highlight the fact that the economy didn't take off until Newt changed the trajectory of the debate.
President Obama is too arrogant to be frightened by that debate, which means Speaker Boehner should be able to turn this situation into a discussion on getting America's economy going for the first time during President Obama's administration.
With expensive utility bills, shrinking paychecks, high gas and grocery prices and unacceptably high unemployment rates, the indictment against President Obama's mishandling of the economy should be lengthy and powerful.
Finally, he should unleash Paul Ryan. Speaker Boehner should insist on a televised fiscal cliff summit, with Ryan leading the prosecution of the case against President Obama's reckless spending. Dave Camp should prosecute the case for why the GOP tax reform plan will strengthen the economy.
GOP senators and governors should take part in this summit, too. One tactic President Obama has overplayed is saying that 'we can talk about that' on a variety of policies, then dropping that position the minute he's out of the room. Republicans should tell him that implementing a pro-growth economic plan is non-negotiable.
Finally, make the case that raising the top marginal tax rates won't affect the Warren Buffetts of the world because their income comes from investments, not wages. Make the case that raising the top marginal tax rates will hurt small businesses, not the evil Wall Street fatcats President Obama always talks about.
President Obama's policies are failing. Speaker Boehner's ineptitude in highlighting those failures has the fiscal cliff conversation heading in the wrong direction. It's time to change the direction of that conversation.
Tags: Fiscal Cliff , John Boehner , Debate , Fiscal Cliff Summit , Paul Ryan , Dave Camp , John Kasich , Bobby Jindal , Marco Rubio , Tax Reform , Spending Reform , GOP , President Obama , Unemployment , Deficits , Gas Prices , Electric Bills , Groceries , Inflation , Median Household Income , Democrats
Posted Friday, December 7, 2012 6:32 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 07-Dec-12 08:16 AM
I think there is a simpler course. Boehner should just walk away from the negotiations and publicly ask, "What did you do with the last 20 budgets we passed through the House? Let's start there."
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 07-Dec-12 02:55 PM
Jerry, we can't afford to miss opportunities to educate people. This is the perfect teaching moment because the whole nation is watching.
Comment 3 by eric z at 07-Dec-12 05:15 PM
Yes, the nation is watching. It even distracts you from your passionately wanting to throw Susan Rice over the non-fiscal cliff. And, boy, that is something!
Boehner is being obstructionist, and should stop.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 08-Dec-12 07:39 AM
Boehner is in over his head. He should be telling the nation that President Obama's economic policies are causing the annual $1,000,000,000,000+ deficits. President Obama's spending has been reckless. The EPA's regulations have started killing the coal & natural gas industries. The Democrats' middle class squeeze is hurting families.
And you have the audacity to say Republicans are the problem? Start living in the real world, Mr. Zaetsch.
Comment 4 by eric z at 08-Dec-12 10:58 AM
Gary - reality is that this is Obama's second term.
Reality is executive and bicameral DFL dominion in Minnesota.
Things that don't work, or that only work for a priviliged few have been rejected.
Except for Wilfare. Hang Dayton for that one if you will, but it would be a very full gallows, a bipartisan one, unfortunately. It is shameful. Stimulus construction spending could have been better routed.
Reality is the Republicans only talk about deficits when the Dems have won election majorities. When Cheney-W were in play, ringing up two war fronts on the credit card with the Chinese, where was LFR in emphasizing the evils of deficits?
AWOL.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 08-Dec-12 05:43 PM
That's mostly BS, Eric. Things "that only work for a privileged few" thrives in the Obama administration. Solyndra & the other green jobs disasters were taxpayer payoffs to President Obama's bundlers. That's indisputable.
Too big to fail was written into perpetuity by Chris Dodd of "Friends of Angelo" & Statewide corruption fame & by Barney 'Everything's fine at Fannie & Freddie' Frank.
Aren't Fannie & Freddie run by remnants of the Clintonistas?
In fact, the corruption within this administration makes the Clinton administration look like the Mormon Tabernacle Choir.
As for this fiction that I didn't speak out against the Bush deficits, you're full of it. I most certainly spoke out against it. It isn't my fault you ignored what I said about his spending habits & Tom DeLay's lust for K Street campaign contributions.
You keep whining about "putting two wars on the nation's credit card" but you don't say that the combined deficits from 2003-2006 were $150,000,000,000 less than this administration's smallest deficit.
The last Bush deficit with a GOP Congress was $161,000,000,000. This administration's reckless spending habits & terrible economic policies have led to a dozen months with deficits bigger than the 2006 Bush deficit.
Candidates emerge for MnDOT/Department of Light Rail Subsidies
This AP article says that 2 people have emerged as candidates to replace Tom Sorel as the next MnDOT Commissioner:
One finalist is Charlie Zelle, the president and chief executive officer of Jefferson Lines. The regional bus company operates in 13 states from North Dakota to Texas and has a sister charter company as well.
Zelle is a former investment banker who returned to Minnesota to run his family's company. He also serves as the chairman of the Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce, giving him deep connections in the business community. He gained notice this summer for being among the Minnesota business executives to publicly advocate and contributing financially to the defeat of a constitutional amendment to permanently ban gay marriage.
The other finalist is Bernie Arseneau, the acting commissioner. He has worked at the department for three decades. An engineer, Arseneau took on a more visible role after the Interstate 35W bridge collapse by helping coordinate alternative traffic plans to compensate for the disruption of a key artery.
Based on recent news stories, the next Commissioner of MnDOT should expect to pay more attention to selling light rail construction and the subsidies that taxpayers will have to pay for the next half century.
It's clear that environmentalists, including Gov. Dayton and Alida Messinger, don't like people having the freedom of driving cars. Though Gov. Dayton has said he won't push the 40-cent-a-gallon gas tax increase proposed by his Transportation Advisory Commission , he didn't take the tax increase that would pay for light rail projects.
Light rail is a waste of the taxpayers' money. Despite the progressives' continuous sales pitch on LRT, LRT hasn't caught on. What's worst is that taxpayers will pay massive subsidies annually for the next fifty years on each of these policy excesses.
Any swing district DFL legislator that votes for tax increases that fund additional LRT projects must be defeated the next time they're up for re-election. The taxpayers should take their frustration out on the DFL's reckless spending on special interests' projects.
Tags: MnDOT , Tom Sorel , Charlie Zelle , Bernie Arseneau , Mark Dayton , Alida Messinger , Environmentalists , Progressives , Tax Hikes , LRT , Subsidies , DFL
Posted Friday, December 7, 2012 7:24 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 07-Dec-12 05:12 PM
Do you know the relative cost, building ten miles of light rail, vs. adding two additional ten mile lanes to a highway? Since light rail goes both ways, the multiplier "two" is justified?
Aside from gasoline tax questions, a highway grid exists which either becomes gridlocked from growth, it is expanded, or demand on the road network is lessened via a comprehensive light rail grid in parallel, or we muddle as is.
Light rail will not be productive as fully as feasible with only a few pieces. That is why I thought Northstar was ill-concieved, as the "next piece" of things - also, Northstar does not own its right of way and every change needs BNSF negotiations/approval. They own the tracks.
A lion's share of the Ramsey station on Northstar was the payout of more money to BNSF.
I know, BNSF are private sector, hence "job creators" but they shake down our governments who conceived and implemented Northstar.
Will it ever get to St. Cloud? That is secondary to the primary question, what's the best return on investment, extending Northstar, or building out the Twin Cities grid, where gridlock is greatest, so that MnDOT then may have freed resources for rural roads - for you St. Cloud folks.
Comment 2 by Nick at 07-Dec-12 06:07 PM
Light rail makes sense for cities with a large Metropolitan Statistical Area such as Chicago, LA, and NYC, but not for cities with a smaller MSA such as St. Cloud.
Comment 3 by Nick at 07-Dec-12 06:13 PM
Myths of LRT: http://reason.org/files/760155cae7ee4c80205854259f5c669a.pdf
Comment 4 by walter hanson at 08-Dec-12 04:58 PM
Eric:
If light rail is so efficient and cheap why is the first one (the one that runs from Mall of America to downtown) losing money for each rider? With the roads since that is paid for with taxes meant to pay for it like gasoline or car tabs.
You are aware we can build far more miles of road per dollar then we can light rail lines?
You are aware once the roads are built we don't pay a subsidy to the people who drive on them?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Sen. Bakk of Edina, Woodbury, Burnsville and Apple Valley
Presumptive Senate Majority Leader Bakk allegedly represents SD-3 in northern Minnesota. I say allegedly for two reasons. First, he didn't get much financial support from within the district . According to the report, Sen. Bakk got $1,000 from his district. By comparison, Sen. Bakk got $7,760 in contributions from the Twin Cities and $500 from New Jersey.
The reason why that's relevant is because Sen. Bakk hasn't uttered a peep about Gov. Dayton, Secretary Ritchie and Rebecca Otto decided to shaft miners in Sen. Bakk's district. In fact, Sen. Bakk was joined in silence by David Dill, David Thomassoni, Tom Saxhaug, Tom Anzelc and Carly Melin after the State Executive Council's decision to shaft the miners.
The Silent Six haven't spoken out for their constituents because they can't speak out because Alida Messinger will quit writing checks to the DFL and the House and Senate DFL campaign committees.
The Silent Six, led by Sen. Bakk, have put campaign contributions ahead of what's best for their constituents. What proof exists that the Silent Six have passionately fought for their constituents? Fighting for a few extra dollars for the IRRRB doesn't count because the IRRRB isn't fighting for miners either.
A question that doesn't need asking is whether the DFL has the cajones to tell Alida Messinger to take a hike. Selling their soul for campaign contributions might get them a legislative majority but it isn't helping the DFL do what's right for Minnesota's blue collar workers.
I'll guarantee that the GOP would approve those leases if they had a majority on the State Executive Council. In fact, they'd help create 1,000 jobs almost instantly upon being sworn into office.
Finally, the Silent Six represent what's wrong with Minnesota politics. They didn't pretend to care about their constituents. They sold their constituents out the minute they got their thirty pieces of silver.
The DFL isn't the party of the people any more.
Tags: Tom Bakk , Campaign Contributions , Edina , Woodbury , Burnsville , Apple Valley , Special Interests , State Executive Council , Mining , Leases , DFL
Posted Tuesday, December 11, 2012 1:38 AM
No comments.
Twin Cities DFL kills mining again, Part II
Once again, the Twin Cities DFL voted to drive another nail in the miners' coffin :
The state Executive Council in St. Paul voted 3-1 to delay the leases pending a decision by the Minnesota Court of Appeals on whether an Environmental Assessment Worksheet should be done to gauge potential environmental impact where the exploration will take place.
Mining companies want the leases to expand their search for copper, nickel, gold, platinum and other valuable metals away from known deposits and into new areas. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources ruled in October that no environmental review was necessary before the leases are awarded. But several northern Minnesota citizens disagreed, and last month they filed a petition with the Court of Appeals.
The same citizens on Thursday asked the Executive Council to hold off on approving the leases until the court has ruled.
Gov. Mark Dayton, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and State Auditor Rebecca Otto agreed, and voted to delay action. Attorney General Lori Swanson supported the DNR leases. Lt. Gov. Yvonne Prettner Solon was not at Thursday's meeting in St. Paul.
Dayton went as far as scolding DNR officials for not making the minerals lease process more open and accessible for public input, and he called for a meeting in his office in the near future to include concerned citizens and top DNR staff.
Gov. Dayton's hissy fit is great theatrics but the Executive Council's vote says it all. The Twin Cities DFL consistently votes against the mining industry's interests:
It's the second time in as many years that the Executive Council has delayed mineral leases, although for different reasons. In 2011 the board delayed action after many private landowners said they were not aware the state held mineral rights under their land and that the state was about to allow mining companies to drill there. Despite sympathizing with the landowners' plight, and delaying action for several months, the council eventually approved the 2011 leases in May this year.
This time the issue isn't private property but what kind of impact drilling and other exploration activity might have on public and private lands, especially in sensitive areas near wetlands, trout streams, state parks and trails. Several of the latest proposed leases are in Lake County, near state parks and North Shore trout streams, said Matt Tyler, the Finland resident who has led the effort for environmental review before mineral leases are approved.
Every time the Executive Council votes to delay the letting of mineral leases is a delay to creating high-paying mining jobs. It's also an opportunity for them to lie about what's really motivating them. This year, the Executive Council, aka the DFL statewide officeholders, said that they wanted the Minnesota Court of Appeals to rule on whether an Environmental Assessment Worksheet should be done prior to letting the leases.
Last year, the Executive Council twice delayed the letting of leases under the premise that Arrowhead and Iron Range landowners didn't know they didn't own the mineral rights to their property . When the State Executive Council voted for delaying the leases, Prof. Kent Kaiser wrote an LTE scoffing at that notion while expressing his anger with the Twin Cities DFL:
This month, Minnesota's State Executive Council, which includes the governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, attorney general and state auditor, voted to delay 77 leases to explore for copper and nickel on private lands in northern Minnesota.
This short-sighted action was initiated by Gov. Mark Dayton and Secretary of State Mark Ritchie. It was unfortunate for the job situation in the Northland, and I know many Minnesotans are terribly disappointed.
After all, the people of Minnesota own the rights to minerals in the state, including those under private land. Anyone from Northeastern Minnesota knows this; I remember learning this fact in elementary school .
The Twin Cities DFL will always get its way because they'd rather kill the mining industry outright. That isn't speculation. The DFL has made their point exceptionally clear:
Conservation Minnesota, Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness and the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy are targeting the proposed PolyMet mine near Hoyt Lakes and the proposed Twin Metals mine near Ely.
The campaign includes the web site MiningTruth.org, a 40-page report examining mining in detail, a Facebook community, and four billboards along Interstate 35 between the Twin Cities and Duluth to reach summer travelers.
Those complaining that these organizations aren't the DFL are arguing over semantics. Alida Messinger sits on Conservation Minnesota's Board of Directors. People who've read LFR (and Shot in the Dark) know that Alida owns the DFL and ABM , otherwise known as the deceitful, smear campaign wing of the DFL:
Alida wants to kill precious metal mining before it starts. That isn't speculation. That's what the International Falls Journal reported. As disgusting as Twin Cities DFL politicians are, they pail in comparison with the cowardice of Iron Range DFL politicians. They're the people who are supposed to stand up for their constituents. Since this delay, as with the other times the State Executive Council voted against the miners' interest, Senators Tom Bakk, David Thomassoni, and Tom Saxhaug didn't criticize the DFL members of the State Executive Committee. Ditto with Representatives Tom Anzelc, Carly Melin and Dave Dill.
These spineless wimps let the Twin Cities DFL elitists ruin the lives of Iron Range miners without the Iron Range DFL criticizing the elitists. It's time that Iron Range voters threw out the Silent Six for not looking out for the Iron Range's best interests.
Likewise, Iron Range voters shouldn't vote DFL in the statewide elections, either. Gov. Dayton, Secretary of State Ritchie and State Auditor Rebecca Otto consistently vote against the miners' interests. I'll guarantee that electing a GOP-filled State Executive Council will prove to be a vote for the best interests of mining communities.
It's that simple.
Tags: Mark Dayton , Mark Ritchie , Rebecca Otto , Alida Messinger , Conservation Minnesota , Militant Environmentalists , Twin Cities DFL , Iron Range , Tom Bakk , David Thomassoni , Tom Saxhaug , Tom Anzelc , Carly Melin , DFL , Iron Range DFL , Miners , Unions , MnGOP
Originally posted Saturday, December 8, 2012, revised 05-Mar 1:15 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 08-Dec-12 08:11 AM
I understand what you are saying with this but I no longer feel sorry for those on the range because they continually vote for the people that cause them harm. I thought maybe things had changed in 2010 with the election of Cravaack but then they go and vote in Nolan.
Comment 2 by eric z at 08-Dec-12 09:58 AM
With no jobs on the Iron Range, all those folks will move to St. Cloud, where things are booming so much that the local pundits need not talk of jobs and business there.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 08-Dec-12 04:53 PM
Eric:
So it is your position that you don't want miners to have high paying jobs on the iron range? Don't you want those high taxes which you want people to pay their share.
You do understand that there are businesses that want to employ people and pay jobs. Wouldn't a governor, a secretary of State, and a state auditor want jobs and economic growth?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 4 by Bob J. at 10-Dec-12 09:43 AM
Time to let the range learn that elections have consequences. You get what you vote for and what they seem to want is bloated government and unemployment. Fine. Let them have it.
Twin Cities DFL kills mining again, Part II
This op-ed by Rolf Westgard states the damage done by the Twin Cities DFL in its attempts to killing precious metal mining projects.
Last spring, Conservation Minnesota created a website telling Minnesotans that projects like the Twin Metals mining project near Ely and the PolyMet precious metals mining project near Hoyt Lakes would severely damage watersheds. Mr. Westgard refutes that:
There is a 714-page Draft Environmental Impact Statement(DEIS) for the Polymet Project from the Minnesota DNR and the Corps of Engineers. It is clear from the Statement that any effluent from the project ends up in the drainage areas of the Partridge and Embarrass Rivers. Those rivers flow south to the St Louis River and Lake Superior, not north to the Boundary Waters.
The DEIS is generally positive about the project, and it suggests that if all of Polymet's commitments are met, there is no serious impact on the environment. The following quote from the DEIS on the Partridge River applies to its analysis of all three rivers involved: 'Even with these higher loadings and assuming no natural attenuation, the model results indicate that water quality standards for the Partridge River would be maintained for the eight constituents studied (i.e., antimony, arsenic, fluoride, cobalt, copper, nickel, vanadium, and sulfate) under all flow conditions and mine years modeled. Therefore, even using relatively conservative assumptions, the Proposed Action is not predicted to result in any exceedances of surface water quality standards for the Partridge River at the modeled locations.'
Simply put, the DEIS's findings refute everything Conservation Minnesota and Alida Messinger said about these mining projects. What's more important is that Conservation Minnesota's fearmongering-filled campaign against Twin Metals, PolyMet and other proposed mining projects might have a significant impact:
The state of Minnesota owns more than 6,000 acres of land in the region, and I estimate that Minnesota's schools would collect at least $2.0 billion in royalties in the coming decades if these new mining projects proceed. This state property is known as "school trust lands." Under the Minnesota Constitution, income from such lands is earmarked for the Permanent School Fund, which contributes about $60 per pupil to every school district. An analysis by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources projected that the school fund, with assets of $720 million, could more than triple in size with these new royalties over 25 to 30 years.
In other words, preventing these mining projects from happening is stealing $60 per year for each public school student for the next thirty years. That's the impact that Conservation Minnesota and other militant environmentalist organizations would have on school funding.
What's most disturbing is the fact that the EPA is essentially admitting that they're rejecting PolyMet's proposal for political reasons :
PolyMet is the furthest along in the environmental review and permitting process. In 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency gave the company's draft Environmental Impact Statement a failing grade, calling the mine's environmental impacts 'unacceptable' and the review itself 'inadequate.'
Dr. Westgard isn't the oil companies' shill. He isn't the mining companies' shill either. Dr. Westgard is "a professional member [of the] Geological Society of America and is guest faculty on energy subjects for the U of Minnesota LIfelong Learning program." If Dr. Westgard is convinced that the Arrowhead, the Iron Range and especially the Partridge River won't be negatively affected by these projects, then it's imperative that these projects get started ASAP.
These projects will rejuvenate the Iron Range's economy while pouring significant money into K-12 education without hurting the environment. Why wouldn't Conservation Minnesota, the Metro DFL and the Silent Six jump at this win-win-win opportunity?
Tags: Conservation Minnesota , MiningTruth.org , Alida Messinger , Mark Dayton , Mark Ritchie , Tom Bakk , Tom Saxhaug , Tom Anzelc , David Thomassoni , Dave Dill , Carly Melin , The Silent Six , DFL , Iron Range , Education , Economy , Employment , Twin Metals , PolyMet , Mining
Posted Monday, December 10, 2012 6:26 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 10-Dec-12 07:08 AM
"If all of Polymet's committments are met ..."
Pigs fly before mining does not cut every corner it can get away with.
Corner cutting is how mining profits are maximized.
And this draft impact statement, who paid the piper to call that tune?
Comment 2 by eric z at 10-Dec-12 07:14 AM
One thing I have missed in all this discussion, Gary, something you can be helpful on if you know the answer.
Has Polyment successfully and without major environmental consequences done at any two places worldwide, this type of mining, on this scale, in largely comparable environmental situations?
If they have that kind of "take it to the bank" track record I would have expected it to have been a big part of discussions already.
Absent that, it is "Trust me" without any track record deserving trust, or do I misunderstand mining and how a past relates to a likely present and future?
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 10-Dec-12 02:19 PM
Eric, You're living 150 miles away from the Range. You're clueless about the Range's geography. These environmentalist organizations have lied from the start about the damage these mines will do.
They didn't factor in the continental divides & how the water runs away from the Superior National Forest.
If you want to argue about this, first study whether any of these organizations' claims are physically possible.
As for these companies' track records, they're irrelevant because they're proposing to use existing environmental infrastructure.
Comment 4 by walter hanson at 10-Dec-12 04:38 PM
Eric:
You might want to check your reading skills. The post clearly states it is DNR. It's not the mines.
So if Pollymet gets to make money by hiring thousands of miners and spending millions of dollars to build a mine or more than one mine you don't want them to do that.
So Eric if your reading skills are bad do you understand a business not making an investment that it wants to make the people being harmed are the workers who will get hired (oh I guess you don't want people to get jobs).
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 5 by eric z at 10-Dec-12 07:51 PM
Walter, thanks. I reread the post. First time through I missed all the detail about the mining track record Polymet has to offer, its skills and its sensitivty about acid rain and other ills. Thanks for pointing that all the detail was there. Appreciate it greatly.
Comment 6 by walter hanson at 13-Dec-12 04:57 PM
Eric:
You need to reread one more time. This was from the report, "The DEIS is generally positive about the project, and it suggests that if all of Polymet's commitments are met, there is no serious harm to the environment."
So Eric if there is no serious harm to the environment then there was no reason for Dayton, Ritchie, or Swanson to vote no let alone.
So Eric you're admiting besides not being able to read that you don't want to employ people on environmentally safe projects.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Retiring Rep. Rukavina: still fighting for the Iron Range
When the Minnesota Executive Council decided to postpone the approval of the initial exploration leases, the DFL denied the Iron Range's miners the opportunity to make a better living for themselves . That wasn't a smart thing to do. Retiring Rep. Rukavina responded to my email to him. Here's the email I wrote Rep. Rukavina:
Rep. Rukavina, As a conservative writer, I've rarely agreed with your policies but I've always admired how you fought for the people of your district. I'd appreciate your opinion on the State Executive Council's decision to postpone their decision on approving new leases for mineral exploration.
It pains me to see the disparity in incomes between St. Louis County ($44,941) vs. the statewide average ($57,243). There's no reason why that disparity is that wide. Frankly, it's disgraceful.
Rep. Ruckavina, I'm in the process of writing an article about the Executive Council's vote for Examiner.com & I'd love getting your perspective on their decision. Just reply to this email if you're interested. I promise to publish your statement verbatim in my article.
Good luck in your retirement. Though I disagreed with you, I always appreciated your willingness to fight for your constituents. That's an honorable thing to do.
Gary Gross
Here's Rep. Rukavina's reply:
Gary
I'm perplexed. I sent an email to the three who voted no, I'm awaiting a reply. Frankly, if Gov Dayton is pissed off at the DNR (hell, Rangers have been pissed off at them forever), he should fire some top dogs over there. But don't take it out on the good people of the Range who have been mining for 130 years and playing by the rules that some folks now want to change.
Perplexed and pissed off would better describe my reaction. But hey, I'm a has been but I have been wondering why I'm the only member of the Range delegation who seems
concerned about this. Perhaps it's because I'm the only member of the Range delegation who represents the real Iron Range and has never represented any other constituents in my 26 year tenure.
Sorry for not answering you sooner. I'm falling behind on emails as I have been
doing home projects that I neglected for two decades!
There's nothing for Rep. Rukavina to be sorry about. It isn't his fault that the DFL doesn't consistently fight for the citizens of the Iron Range.
I didn't hide the fact that I'm a passionate conservative from Rep. Rukavina. That didn't matter to him. His first concern was about his constituents. I respect Rep. Rukavina for tring to put his constituents first.
Tags: Minnesota Executive Council , Conservation Minnesota , Mining , Tom Rukavina , Iron Range , Twin Metals , PolyMet , DFL
Posted Wednesday, December 12, 2012 3:35 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 12-Dec-12 01:43 PM
Birds of a feather ...
Comment 2 by Speed Gibson at 12-Dec-12 10:20 PM
I thought the Range put Dayton over Anderson-Kelliher in the DFL Primary. You'd think Dayton would want to repay that, and it's good business for MN regardless. Maybe Alida is pulling more strings.
Regardless, Rukavina will be missed. You never have to guess what he's thinking and however misguided, his loyalty to Minnesota is genuine. I hope he goes on camera more now, putting that wonderful sense of humor to work.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 12-Dec-12 11:13 PM
I heartily agree, Rex.
Comment 3 by eric z at 13-Dec-12 08:05 AM
How's the Brodkorb lawsuit going, and what's the public's bill, so far, for this Republican innovation?
You guys should stick to what you are good at. Fighting one another at the public's expense.
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 13-Dec-12 09:14 AM
How's the Brodkorb lawsuit going, and what's the public's bill, so far, for this Republican innovation?How's the DFL doing washing the stench of Rep. Gauthier's disgusting, deviant behavior from leadership's hands?
You act like only Republicans act badly. Why don't you call out thugs like the unionistas in Michigan who collapsed a tent filled with people because Gov. Snyder signed a bill into law? Why don't you criticize these thugs for attacking a journalist?
Oh, that's right. If it's done while supporting liberal policies, everything else is forgiven.
It must suck belonging to a political party as corrupt as the DFL.
Comment 5 by walter hanson at 13-Dec-12 06:57 PM
The state of Minnesota is losing a whole lot less money on that lawsuit then the millions of tax dollars that will be created with mines. Oh that's right you don't think that money exists. That explains why you can't make the connection that if Obama gets his soak the rich tax increases he still has to cut the budget $1.113 trillion dollars a year (not a trillion or two over ten years)
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Twin Cities DFL kills mining again, Part III
It's indisputable that the Twin Cities DFL has repeatedly voted to kill precious metals mining projects in Ely and Hoyt Lakes. It's indisputable that Iron Range DFL legislators didn't criticize the State Executive Council when they shafted miners this week. They've tried spinning their votes in a variety of ways but the truth is inescapable: the metro DFL hates mining and will go to extraordinary lengths to stop future mining projects from becoming reality.
It isn't surprising that Gov. Dayton voted to shaft the miners. As Prof. Kent Kaiser highlighted in an op-ed over a year ago, Gov. Dayton has a history of shafting miners:
Indeed, Dayton's actions this month were more consistent with his actions two decades ago. At that time, when he was on the State Executive Council as state auditor, he called for the postponement of mining lease votes so he could consult first with the Sierra Club.
While Gov. Dayton's actions throughout history have been disgusting, they pale in comparison to what he's done, with the help of the DFL's militant environmentalist allies, to miners and the Iron Range.
After the 2010 U.S. Census, it was noted that the median household income for St. Louis County, which is the heart of the Iron Range, was $44,941, compared with the statewide average of $57,243. That's a $12,302 disparity between St. Louis County and the statewide average. It gets worse when compared against Sherburne County's median household income, which is $71,704, a disparity of $26,763.
It isn't just the income disparity that paints the truth about the DFL. It's the fact that the Twin Metals project in Ely and the PolyMet project in Hoyt Lakes would create 1,000 high-paying mining jobs that would end that income disparity while dramatically lifting Iron Range's economy from mediocre to exceptional.
Notice that I said those project would create 1,000 mining jobs. That's before factoring in the support jobs those operations would require. That's before factoring in the possibility of manufacturing operations moving into cities like Hibbing, Grand Rapids and Eveleth to take advantage of the minerals.
That's before talking about how other mining projects would boost school funding through mining leases in the school land swap areas that the DFL and their militant environmentalist allies are preventing. Some estimates say that these projects could add $2,000,000,000 to the school trust fund over the life of those mining operations.
The clear message from Conservation Minnesota and Friends of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness is that precious metal mining is a different, more environmentally unsafe, type of mining. Kennecott has a sterling reputation for limiting and reducing emissions. While this video is of their mining operation in Utah, they were good stewards of their Flambeau River mining operation in Wisconsin. Here's what their Flambeau River mine:
This link includes an aerial photo of what the Flambeau Mine looks like 16 years after it ceased operations.
Conservation Minnesota, another subsidiary of the Dayton Politics family of political operations, talks the environmentalist talk. Kennecott walks the environmentalist walk.
It's clear that Kennecott is the real steward of the land.
Tags: Conservation Minnesota , Alida Messinger , Sierra Club , Mark Dayton , Environmentalists , DFL , Kennecott Mining , Daybreak , Utah , Flambeau River , Wisconsin , Twin Metals , PolyMet , Minnesota , Conservationists , Median Household Income , Jobs
Originally posted Thursday, December 13, 2012, revised 05-Mar 1:14 AM
Comment 1 by MplsSteve at 13-Dec-12 08:47 AM
An excellent post as usual, Gary.
But in two years from now, that area will vote strongly for Dayton's re-election. So will Tom Rukavina.
Comment 2 by NARNfan at 13-Dec-12 09:17 AM
This is a great explanation of how mindbogglingly foolish it is to do something like this in an era of so much easy money that central banks likely can't reel in.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-12/gold-its-time
Plus thrown global demographics and adoption of capitalism.
Mining is a huge equalizer these days.
Comment 3 by eric z. at 18-Dec-12 11:18 AM
Should I be waiting until Part LXXII, until making a summary comment? What?
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Dec-12 01:29 PM
Do whatever you want, Eric. I just got home from a routine operation. Blogging will probably be light the rest of this week.
Comment 4 by eric z. at 18-Dec-12 11:21 AM
You know Gary, it might be more productive if you were to contact Congressman-elect Nolan with your concerns.
