February 1-3, 2012
Feb 01 01:43 Chip Cravaack, gridlock breaker Feb 01 10:34 MnPublius still denies voter fraud happens Feb 01 11:41 The anti-Mitt rumble grows Feb 02 01:27 Minnesota Senate's responsibility, Gov. Dayton's temper tantrum Feb 02 10:41 Romney's progressive thinking Feb 02 15:51 Laffer praises Newt's tax plan Feb 03 06:07 How can you find voter fraud if you refuse to look for it? Feb 03 16:46 Potter's decision looking foolish
Prior Months: Jan
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Chip Cravaack, gridlock breaker
Tuesday afternoon, Chip Cravaack's office issued this statement on the FAA Air Transportation Modernization and Safety Improvement Act:
"After a five-year delay and 23 temporary extensions, this FAA compromise is critical to advancing the nearly eight percent of our nation's economy impacted by the aviation industry. I commend my colleagues in the House and Senate for working toward a middle-ground solution in the best interest of American workers and their families.'
'While I have always said that EAS needs to be reformed, I've worked hard to ensure this long-term funding bill protects Minnesota aviation and construction workers, and finally provides much needed certainty for family budgets.'
Jim Oberstar was the House Transportation Committee chair for 4 of those 5 years. Oberstar's leadership produced the "five-year delay and 23 temporary extensions."
Combine that with the likelihood that PolyMet Mining will become reality this year, another thing Rep. Oberstar didn't get done, and you've got the picture that Chip is a problem-solver. Rep. Oberstar's reputation is that of being a porkmeister.
It isn't surprising that the DCCC is targeting Chip this year. Before the 2010 midterms, Democrats had held Oberstar's seat for over 60 years. They aren't likely to just give up on Chip's seat.
It isn't likely that they'll retake Oberstar's seat, either. Chip's accomplishments are substantial. Chip's accomplishments include creating great paying new jobs on the Range.
The legislation, now prepared for passage, ensures long-term aviation safety and infrastructure funding for the next four years. Importantly, the legislation will not terminate existing Essential Air Service (EAS) programs in Minnesota. Conference reports cannot be amended.
Rep. Oberstar's recent history shows that he didn't come close to settling this budget. That's a committee chair's first responsibility. If that's the criteria, Rep. Oberstar's grade couldn't top a C, with a C- a distinct possibility.
By comparison, Chip's grade in helping Minnesota and MN-8 has to be at least a B, with a B+ a definite possibility.
That's the difference between Beltway leadership and real leadership.
Tags: Transportation , Chip Cravaack , Essential Air Service , PolyMet , Mining , MNGOP , Jim Oberstar , Pork , DCCC , Election 2012
Posted Wednesday, February 1, 2012 1:43 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 01-Feb-12 09:07 AM
Looking forward to an analysis of Florida. Digby had an interesting "Florida surge" post.
"I was going to write about the results in Florida tonight but, why bother? It's a money race and the guy with the most money is winning. Shocker.
"[...]
"[Romney]has proved that he will spend whatever it takes to destroy his opponents and that's got to be appealing to a fair number of Republicans. But they still don't like him much. According to the exit polls, 39% are not satisfied with GOP candidates and 57% want someone else to jump in."
Did Newt allow Romney's negative SuperPAC spending arm to gain traction by taking things too negative, and in turn, by not saying enough about his own conservative positive aspects? Is it all about money, with three of the four thus doomed? Back when Goldwater and Rockefeller were dueling for a run at LBJ, the Rockefeller wing did NOT successfully buy things, as it appears now.
Comment 2 by eric z. at 01-Feb-12 09:11 AM
On Chip C., PolyMet will be a mess for years, if not done properly. Does Chip C. have it in him, to be tough on ensuring any mining done is done with regard for the pristine north lake country; or will he let it all go through on the cheap? I have not heard any commitment to doing it right, cleanly, and with money in escrow up front so that it's not - move out the machinery and put a lock on the front gate - good luck cleaning it up - we're finished. Has he made that commitment?
MnPublius still denies voter fraud happens
It's painful reading the lefty blogs because they can't think their way out of a wet paper bag. MnPublius's Big E is a prime example of the ABM-inspired, Chanting Points progressive blogger. Despite mountains of proof, he's still insisting that proof of voter fraud doesn't exist :
Vote suppression organization MN Majority is still trying to find some vote fraud in Minnesota. They're having quite a hard time of it. They've always found a few cases here and there but never the systemic fraud they so desperately seek.
It's difficult, if not impossible to argue that the SVCs that the USPS returned because the address doesn't exist isn't proof of voter fraud:
Minnesota Majority today released a report on voters flagged for challenge in the statewide voter registration system (SVRS) because of official election mailings to their listed addresses being returned as undeliverable by the United States Postal Service. The mailings, commonly known as postal verification cards (PVCs) are sent to newly registered voters as a means of confirming their provided address and residence at that address. Thousands of voters were flagged for challenge following the 2008 and 2010 general election in Minnesota.
'The PVC is the only real test we have for confirming a voter's residence, and we often don't perform that verification until after a person has voted,' said Minnesota Majority president Jeff Davis. 'After the 2008 election, over 6,000 Election Day registrants were found to have provided addresses that were undeliverable and after 2010 there were over 1,200 more that remain unexplained even after accounting for voters who moved shortly after voting. This is a strong indicator of the possibility of voter fraud.'
It's time to call the left out on this. They're liars when it comes to voter fraud. If you don't believe Minnesota Majority, then it's time you were confronted by a liberal like Artur Davis. Here's what Democrat Artur Davis said about voter fraud :
I've changed my mind on voter ID laws; I think Alabama did the right thing in passing one; and I wish I had gotten it right when I was in political office.
When I was a congressman, I took the path of least resistance on this subject for an African American politician. Without any evidence to back it up, I lapsed into the rhetoric of various partisans and activists who contend that requiring photo identification to vote is a suppression tactic aimed at thwarting black voter participation.
The truth is that the most aggressive contemporary voter suppression in the African American community, at least in Alabama, is the wholesale manufacture of ballots, at the polls and absentee, in parts of the Black Belt.
Voting the names of the dead, and the nonexistent, and the too-mentally-impaired to function, cancels out the votes of citizens who are exercising their rights; that's suppression by any light. If you doubt it exists, I don't; I've heard the peddlers of these ballots brag about it, I've been asked to provide the funds for it, and I am confident it has changed at least a few close local election results.
What part of "I've been asked to provide the funds" for voter fraud doesn't the Big E understand? Is it that he understands it perfectly but isn't willing to admit that the Left's chanting points are lies?
Either way, the proof exists. The Left is just too dishonest to admit it.
Tags: Photo ID , Voter Fraud , Artur Davis , USPS , HAVA , Chanting Points , Blogs , DFL , Elections
Posted Wednesday, February 1, 2012 10:34 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 01-Feb-12 07:16 PM
"Absence of proof is not proof of absence." The whole point here is that there is no PROOF that voter fraud does NOT exist, because we don't look, and don't have the tools-- like voter ID-- to DO the looking. For example, there were over 120,000 voters whose names were used two or more times in the last election. Ask those who say that fraud doesn't exist to PROVE that every single one of those duplications were by two different people with the same name, rather than one person voting multiple times. Until they do, I will say there were 60,000 fraudulent votes.
Comment 2 by Adam at 02-Feb-12 12:18 PM
Perhaps the Big E understands that Atur Davis has never lived or worked in politics in Minnesota?
Also, errors in data entry in the SVRS are evidence of fraud? How?
Wouldn't someone trying to commit fraud use an actual address? It's not exactly hard to do, you know.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 02-Feb-12 12:52 PM
Adam, First, are you arguing that the people keying in the addresses for these voter registrations made thousands of typing mistakes? Are you then arguing that these data entry people didn't catch those mistakes? Are you arguing that there's no system in place in the Secretary of State's office to catch those mistakes? Finally, if that's what you're arguing, shouldn't those data entry people be fired for this massive amount of incompetence?
After all, if they're making thousands of mistakes over a large period of time, they're incompetent. Also, what type of idiot Secretary of State would run his office so shoddily that he didn't put in place safeguards to prevent this massive level of incompetence?
Response 2.2 by Gary Gross at 02-Feb-12 01:04 PM
Perhaps, the Big E just chooses to ignore Minnesota's history of attempted voter fraud. Like this attempted voter fraud:
Election Day is upon us. You are confirmed to volunteer with ACT (America Coming Together - http://www.actforvictory.org/) on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov 2. We will be creating name badges that include your Ward and Precinct information for each of the thousands of volunteers that day to make it easier to find a volunteer to vouch for a voter at the polls.
I am emailing you to request your street address, city and zipcode. We've already got your other contact information, but your record in our database does not include this information.
You can save us time on election day by replying today to this email with this information, or give us a call at [phone number with St. Paul area code]. In order to get your badge correct, please reply by Thursday.
Thank you for your help and cooperation. See you on Election Day!Why would an organization that mostly specialized in voter registration need to input people's addresses into a massive statewide data base? Why would they call people volunteers? The only thing that makes sense to thoughtful people is that this was an attempt to commit voter fraud on a massive scale.
Deny it all you'd like but voter fraud exists in Minnesota.
PS- to the idiots claiming that "there's no proof of voter fraud", I'll just say this: if you refuse to look for it, it's impossible to find it. This time, the DFL's corruption stops.
Comment 3 by Adam at 06-Feb-12 12:56 PM
Gary - I think you're getting a little too worked up here.
There are lots of ways for address errors to get into the database. First, you may find it hard to believe, but the people registering to vote will make errors in their own addresses. They'll leave something out or get the zip code wrong or misspell something. People are most decidedly fallible. User errors are especially likely for people who have moved recently, among the most likely to be registering at the polling place. And, of course, even if they get everything right, things may or may not be legible to the person doing the data entry.
The next stage is data entry, where, again, mistakes will be made. And even if 100% accuracy was possible (it isn't, again, for example think about legibility issues), the real world changes in ways that will result in "errors" detected in this manner. People move.
Finally, since when does anyone think the Post Office is infallible ;)
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 06-Feb-12 01:17 PM
In a previous job, I worked closely closely with the USPS. The types of things you're talking about are quickly dealt without the person even noticing or delivery skipping a beat.
The notion that a simple typo will send the system into catastrophic shock at that big a scale isn't reality.
Based on my experience with the USPS, there's only 2 options for that many PVCs getting returned: a massive amount of data entry errors or people lied about their addresses.
Again, based on past experience, it's difficult for me to believe that data entry operators are that unprofessional.
Since there's been lots of voter registration fraud in multiple states the last 3 election cycles, I'm certain what's most likely to have happened.
The anti-Mitt rumble grows
This American Spectator article is just the latest in a growing anti-Mitt chorus. It's a chorus that spells defeat this November. Here's the heart of the article:
The "electability" argument is bankrupt on both philosophical and practical grounds. It destroys the party's soul and guarantees defeat.
Even though Romney paid for this Florida win on his debit card, outspending Newt by millions, he still couldn't nail down the rank-and-file vote. Seven out of ten self-described conservatives didn't vote for him. This foreshadows the boredom and disgust that will keep conservatives home in the fall.
Mitt's been identified as not being a conservative by the base. He's won enough votes to win a couple primaries but exit polling from Florida shows he'll lose this November. The activists that man phone banks and do GOTV won't show up. They need a candidate who inspires people with the right policies.
Visions of a former Paul Tsongas voter and Planned Parenthood supporter won't exactly blast them out of bed in the morning. The confederacy of weasels that is the GOP establishment couldn't even find a moderate with an engaging personality to run. They settled on a robotic bore.
Mitt's supporters can't even make a positive case for Mitt. Listening to this tape is painful but it's highly instructive:
The worst caller said Romneycare was good because Mitt governed in Massachusetts. Another caller said that it's what people wanted at the time. When Mr. Levin said that Romneycare, "whether it's implemented at the city level, the state level or the federal level", infringes on the rights of individuals.
Nowhere in any constitution or city charter does government have the right to infringe on a person's individual sovereignty. It's all the more difficult to tolerate when a ConLaw professor like Hugh Hewitt doesn't just criticize Mitt's defense of O'Romneycare. At minimum, Hugh could take Mitt aside off air and explain why O'Romneycare is unconstitutional.
Chris Christie is a former federal prosecutor. Ann Coulter is a lawyer, too. Neither has the spine to confront Mitt about O'Romneycare. I'd argue that that's proof of a major character flaw on their behalf.
Almost two years after energy from the Tea Party swept Republicans back into congressional power, a politician who embodies the antithesis of that spirit stands on the verge of victory. This is regress, not progress, and the GOP will pay a severe price for the Faustian bargain of "electability" that it entails. A party that chooses power over principle will lose both.
The TEA Party busted their hump to get principled conservatives elected. If Mitt doesn't have an instant and sincere transformation, he'll lose just like McCain did.
Tags: Sovereignty , Romneycare , Mitt Romney , Hugh Hewitt , Chris Christie , Ann Coulter , GOP , Mark Levin , TEA Party , Conservatism , Activism , Election 2012
Posted Wednesday, February 1, 2012 11:41 AM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 01-Feb-12 02:52 PM
Aside from not being a conservative, there's also some coverage out there about his having the personality of a dead fish.
Comment 2 by eric z. at 01-Feb-12 03:06 PM
Gary, you confuse me a little when you say, "Nowhere in any constitution or city charter does government have the right to infringe on a person's individual sovereignty."
Are you talking real "persons" or Citizen United "persons," and an individual corporation's "individual sovereignty?"
Just wondering.
I take it controlled substance criminalization is not something you favor, as it "infringes on a person's individual sovereignty," one's right to ingest as one chooses, etc.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 01-Feb-12 04:03 PM
Re: Citizens United: I won't defend Mitt's idiotic statement. The First Amendment extends to both individuals & corporations just like the Fourth Amendment protects individuals & corporations from unreasonable searches & seizures. Just like individuals & corporations have the right to a speedy trial.
The liberal argument against Citizens United hasn't been that corporations don't have any First Amendment rights.
Based on that logic, that means that Congress will have to write legislation regulating what the right amount of speech is. That's prohibited by the First Amendment.
Remember that the First Amendment doesn't read "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech" except if it's a corporation. It reads "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."
As for mandated health care, that's unconstitutional because it violates the Tenth Amendment. Mitt's fond of saying that the Tenth Amendment gives states more latitude than it gives the federal government. That's true but he's omitting something. Here's what the Tenth Amendment says:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.The things that the federal government isn't responsible for are reserved for the states OR the people.
Considering the fact that the Founding Fathers wanted as many decisions made by families first & cities second suggests that they wanted families to be the most frequent decisionmakers.
Minnesota Senate's responsibility, Gov. Dayton's temper tantrum
If anything is obvious, it's that Gov. Dayton's reaction to Ellen Anderson's rejection was similar to that of a 3-year-old throwing a temper tantrum. As a Minnesotan, I'm embarrassed that a Minnesota governor would be that unhinged.
The truth is that Ellen Anderson isn't a friend of fossil fuels . She's been a green energy activist her entire legislative career. The thought that she's capable of setting aside her passion is foolish. Militant environmentalism isn't what she believes. It's part of who she is.
The other reality is that rejecting commissioners isn't rare. I'd argue that senators have the affirmative responsibility to reject appointees who aren't part of the mainstream. Sen. Anderson was a controversial pick from the outset. She didn't hide her activism. With her lengthy history of environmental activism, why shouldn't the Senate reject her?
What's more disturbing than Gov. Dayton's appointment of Sen. Anderson is his temper tantrum in reaction to the Senate taking their advise-and-consent responsibilities seriously.
Gov. Dayton's temper tantrum is what we'd expect of three-year-olds, not the governor of a state. When was the last time Minnesotans saw their governor act like that? Has Minnesota's governor acted that childish?
HINT: Minnesota's governors haven't acted that childish in my lifetime.
Building an environmentalist-filled cabinet isn't in Minnesota's best interest. That's why the Senate said no. Minnesota's environmental movement has killed enough jobs already. We don't need Gov. Dayton appointing more movement environmentalists to the PUC or the MPCA.
We need thoughtful people who look out for the best interests of all Minnesotans. Sen. Anderson can't do that because of her history of activism.
That's why the Senate would've been irresponsible had it not rejected Sen. Anderson's appointment.
Tags: Militant Environmentalism , Ellen Anderson , PUC , Paul Aasen , MPCA , Mark Dayton , Regulations , Enforcement , DFL , Advise and Consent
Posted Thursday, February 2, 2012 1:27 AM
Comment 1 by Eric at 02-Feb-12 01:45 PM
LFR asks the question "When was the last time Minnesotans saw their governor act like that? Has Minnesota's governor acted that childish?"
Answer- How old are you? From Jan 1999 until Jan 2003 we had almost weekly or for sure monthly child like tantrums by our Governor.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 02-Feb-12 02:03 PM
Thanks for bringing back all those repressed memories, Eric. I'd completely forgotten about Jesse.
Comment 2 by eric z at 02-Feb-12 03:59 PM
Any governor has to have the patience of Job, given the quality of legislators, especially those Dayton faces. He's gotten this far without committing homicide. Given circumstances, that's commendable. Do you think Brodkorb will end up suing? It's commendable he's not committed any homicides either. So far.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 03-Feb-12 01:44 AM
Actually, this GOP majority is outstanding. For the most part, they aren't ideologues. They're people with common sense innovations & ideas.
As for Gov. Dayton, it's amazing that he's governor. With his record of incompetence, he shouldn't have reached the level of chief dog catcher. His cabinet, especially on the environment, is filled with ideologues & political hacks.
Romney's progressive thinking
Mitt's tried making the case that you can't take a chance on Newt because he's likely to say something stupid and kill his campaign. Yesterday, Mitt did something that went beyond anything Newt's ever said. This morning, Mark Steyn jumps all over Mitt's idiotic statement about the poor:
Romney's is a benevolent patrician's view of society: The poor are incorrigible, but let's add a couple more groats to their food stamps and housing vouchers, and they'll stay quiet. Aside from the fact that that kind of thinking has led the western world to near terminal insolvency, for a candidate whose platitudinous balderdash of a stump speech purports to believe in the most Americanly American America that any American has ever Americanized over, it's as dismal a vision of permanent trans-generational poverty as any Marxist community organizer with a cozy sinecure on the Acorn board would come up with.
After half-a-century of evidence, what sort of 'conservative' offers the poor the Even Greater Society? I don't know how 'electable' Mitt is, but, even if he is, the greater danger, given the emptiness of his campaign to date, is that he'll be elected with no real mandate for the course correction the Brokest Nation in History urgently needs. In last Monday's debate, Newt said he wasn't interested in going to Washington to 'manage the decline'. Mitt's just told us that he's happy to 'manage the decline' for the poor, but who knows who else?
It's time America woke up to the fact that Mitt's a) totally wooden and b) policy perscriptions are timid and aren't conservative. He's a cross between John Kerry and Al Gore.
Conservatives have questioned Mitt's electability argument literally for years. Candidates that have lukewarm support of the base are, at best, in hot water. Mitt's disregard for the TEA Party is foolish. Mitt's political instincts are almost nonexistent, as Mitt's "I'm not worried about the very poor" statement proves.
The comparison is stark. Mitt's supporters talk about how presidential he looks. (They said the same thing about John Kerry.) They'll cheerfully tell you that Mitt's private sector experience is essential to understanding how the economy works and creating jobs.
What they won't tell you is that he's had public sector success. That's because he hasn't had any public sector successes.
Predictably, Newt jumped at the opportunity to criticize Mitt :
"I am fed up with politicians in either party dividing Americans against each other," said Gingrich, at his first Nevada event before Saturday's caucuses. Drawing a sharp distinction between himself and Romney, he added, "I am running to be the president of all of the American people, and I am concerned about all of the American people."
Newt wasn't the only conservative who criticized Mitt:
Romney's comment also drew condemnation from Obama partisans who have repeatedly exploited the candidate's quotes to argue that Romney is out of touch. And Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), who endorsed Romney four years ago, encouraged him to "backtrack," saying the very poor needed jobs, not welfare programs.
Mitt didn't make a conservative argument because he's a progressive. This article is proof of that:
The influential conservative group Club for Growth PAC criticized Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's position on the minimum wage, calling it "disappointing."
"Indexing the minimum wage would be an absolute job killer," Club for Growth President Chris Chocola said. "Mitt Romney's proposal is anti-growth and would harm our economy. It's disappointing to hear that the leading candidate for the Republican nomination believes that the government can set the price of labor better than the free market."
Club for Growth's critique was made after a reporter asked Romney aboard his campaign plane Wednesday if he still believed the minimum wage should be indexed to account for inflation , essentially increasing the minimum wage each year to keep up with the cost of living.
Romney failed to expound on his position, but said he has "the same thoughts as in the past." Since he was governor of Massachusetts, Romney has said he supports automatic hikes in the minimum wage.
I wish I could honestly say that Mitt's support for indexing the minimum wage surprised me but it doesn't. What would surprise me is if he actually started supporting conservative principles.
It's become clear. The GOP can support Mitt, who doesn't stand a chance of winning, or they can support a dynamic Reaganite conservative like Newt.
Based on what we've seen, Mitt isn't dynamic, conservative or electable.
Tags: Poor , Mitt Romney , Minimum Wage , Safety Net , Progressives , Reagan , Newt Gingrich , Jim DeMint , Chris Chocola , Club for Growth , GOP , Election 2012
Posted Thursday, February 2, 2012 10:42 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 02-Feb-12 03:48 PM
I thought Michael Douglas in "Wall Street" looked presidential. Tell me I am wrong.
Comment 2 by eric z at 03-Feb-12 10:15 AM
Latest, Strib reporting Feb 3, via an AP feed, that Zellers and Dean will be backing Romney during the caucus process.
It is their prerogative, but they should be clear to note they are speaking as individuals - in anticipation of attending caucus - and not at all as if they state any party consensus view.
Strib's report seems to indirectly imply that they are not offereing personal opinion as "consensus," but Gary, I think you should explicitly say something, in a post if necessary, or at least in a comment following this one.
Party officials should never confuse their personal speaking as if speaking for the party. That was a criticism of Sutton. Or am I wrong about that?
Comment 3 by eric z at 03-Feb-12 10:18 AM
And in endorsing Romney, I would never call either Zellers or Dean "progressive" as the post headlines Romney. They each are as progressive as Caesar was crossing the Rubicon. Likely they each are similarly motivated. Each is as "progressive" the HF 65 sponsors are. The ALEC brand of progressive, I guess.
Comment 4 by Gary Gross at 03-Feb-12 11:33 AM
First, Eric, progressives are found on both sides of the political aisle. As for Zellers & Dean endorsing Mitt, that's their choice.
Chairman Sutton didn't endorse a presidential candidate because there wasn't a presidential race during his time as chairman.
Ron Carey endorsed Mike Huckabee in 2008 when he was RPM chair. He immediately & rightly got criticized for that.
Laffer praises Newt's tax plan
Art Laffer is certainly a somebody when it comes to assessing tax plans on their job creation potential. Yesterday, Laffer wrote this WSJ op-ed saying that Newt's plan is superior to Mitt's plan:
Mr. Gingrich has a significantly better plan than does Mr. Romney, and he has twice before been instrumental in implementing a successful tax plan on a national level - once when he served in Congress as a Reagan supporter in the 1980s and again when he was President Clinton's partner as speaker of the House of Representatives in the 1990s. During both of these periods the economy prospered incredibly - in good part because of Mr. Gingrich.
Jobs and wealth are created by those who are taxed, not by those who do the taxing. Government, by its very nature, doesn't create resources but redistributes resources. To minimize the damages taxes cause the economy, the best way for government to raise revenue is a broad-based, low-rate flat tax that provides people and businesses with the fewest incentives to avoid or otherwise not report taxable income, and the least number of places where they can escape taxation. On these counts it doesn't get any better than Mr. Gingrich's optional 15% flat tax for individuals and his 12.5% flat tax for business. Each of these taxes has been tried and tested and found to be enormously successful.
Mitt's repeatedly said that his time in the private sector has informed him how the economy works. Mitt's insistence that he alone understands what it takes to create jobs just got torched by Art Laffer.
Laffer's argument appears to be that anyone who's read about Hong Kong's prosperity knows how to create wealth. Newt's modeled his tax initiatives after Hong Kong's tax structure.
When Mr. Laffer said that "each of these taxes has been tried and tested and found to be enormously successful", what he really said is that anyone who can read and is a student of history knows that Hong Kong's tax system works wonderfully. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Hong Kong, where there has been a 15% flat income tax on individuals since 1947, is truly a shining city on the hill and one of the most prosperous cities in history. Ireland's 12.5% flat business income tax propelled the Emerald Isle out of two and a half centuries of poverty. Mr. Romney's tax proposals - including eliminating the death tax, reducing the corporate tax rate to 25%, and extending the current tax rates on personal income, interest, dividends and capital gains - would be an improvement over those of President Obama, but they don't have the boldness or internal integrity of Mr. Gingrich's personal and business flat taxes.
Imagine what would happen to international capital flows if the U.S. went from the second highest business tax country in the world to one of the lowest. Low taxes along with all of America's other great attributes would precipitate a flood of new investment in this country as well as a quick repatriation of American funds held abroad. We would create more jobs than you could shake a stick at.
The consensus in the business community is that Mitt's plan is timid. Laffer's opinion is proof of that. Newt's tax reform initiative is bold reform, the type that'd spur the type of growth that'd rival Reagan's.
Newet's right in saying that this contest is about deciding if you want the GOP presidential nominee to manage the decay or if you want someone that's prepared on Day One to change Washington, DC for the better with bold, time-tested policies that'll get America's economy growing again.
This shouldn't be ignored in the cost of taxes:
When it comes to economic efficiency, nothing holds a candle to a low-rate, simple flat tax. As I explained in a op-ed on this page last spring ("The 30-Cent Tax Premium," April 18), for every dollar of net income tax collected by the Internal Revenue Service, there is an additional 30% paid out of pocket by the taxpayers to maintain compliance with the tax code. Such inefficiency is outrageous. Mr. Gingrich's flat taxes would go a lot further toward reducing these additional expenses than would Mr. Romney's proposals.
It's time to implement bold, time-tested tax policies. Timid plans like Mitt's should be rejected.
Tags: Flat Tax , Art Laffer , Newt Gingrich , Hong Kong , Pro Growth , Reagan , Conservatism , Mitt Romney , Middle Class , Class Warfare , Republicans , Election 2012
Posted Thursday, February 2, 2012 3:52 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 02-Feb-12 04:09 PM
Laffer's praise is not necessarily a good thing. Especially when he's bleating about flat taxing being good. Bless Honk Kong. Perhaps Laffer will relocate there, instead of North Dakota, which to believe some, is a haven only for fleeing "job creators." Or at least for them. I never quite listened enough to remember that propaganda. Tax the rich. They have the money.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Feb-12 01:40 AM
Eric, if the U.S. confiscated all the money that the billionaires are worth, it'd run the federal government a little over a month.
The problem is we piss away too much money. Did you know that the percentage of poor people who attended college was greater before Pell Grants were created?
That's because colleges didn't piss the money away on high salaries, big buildings & too many administrators.
I haven't seen the line item breakdown of the federal budget but I'd bet I could cut federal discretionary spending by 25% without breaking a sweat.
As for your 1% argument, there are college administrators making $750,000 a year in salary who don't do anything. That $750,000 doesn't include health insurance or pension compensation.
When you blame the 1%, you immediately assume that they're rich Wall Street fat cats. They aren't. Alot of them are rich college bureaucrats.
You say that you're for working families but your actions say the opposite. If you cared about working families, you'd speak out against these higher ed parasites who steal the public's money while doing nothing to create prosperity for the middle class.
How can you find voter fraud if you refuse to look for it?
Progressives have argued for years that voter fraud doesn't exist, especially in Minnesota. The truth is that it exists. It's that they refuse to look for it. Yesterday, a progressive named Adam argued in the comments that the PVC cards that got returned weren't the result of voter fraud. He argued that they happened because of the biggest data entry problem in government history :
Perhaps the Big E understands that Atur Davis has never lived or worked in politics in Minnesota?
Also, errors in data entry in the SVRS are evidence of fraud? How?
Wouldn't someone trying to commit fraud use an actual address? It's not exactly hard to do, you know.
Think of what Adam said. First, he said that the data entry people were the most incompetent data entry people in government. Next, he admitted that SecState Ritchie's system doesn't have safeguards to catch typos. Third, he admitted that it isn't difficult to commit fraud using a real address.
That's quite a mouthful in a paragraph.
When Joe Mansky insisted that the compliance rate was fantastic , he was either spinning the truth or he's just that intellectually incompetent. Here's what he said:
ESME: We just heard from Rep. Kiffmeyer, who said the system needs voter ID. How do you feel about that?
JOE MANSKY: I don't think that's the case. If you just look at the numbers and the business of the people under felony sentences voting that's been in the news. But let's take a look at that a minute. Our compliance rate, the rate at which voters comply with our law, is 99.99 percent. In Ramsey County, we had 28 people charged out of 278,000 people voting. I don't think that there is a problem. There will always be a small number of people who won't comply with the law. But again, 99.99 percent is probably not a bad place to be at.
Mansky can't know what the compliance rate is because they can't verify that the people getting ballots are who they say they are. Mr. Mansky, like all faithful DFL operatives, refuses to look for voter fraud.
You can't find what you refuse to look for. Minnesotans have rejected the notion that Minnesotans are too honest to commit voter fraud. That's why 75-80% of Minnesotans support a constitutional amendment requiring a photo ID. That figure isn't from Minnesota Majority, either. Whether it's the KSTP-SurveyUSA poll or the Minnesota poll, the numbers are the same . Here are some demographic breakdowns:
- Age demographics - The lowest level of support in age groups comes from seniors, who back voter ID 69/23. The best support comes, surprisingly, from the youngest voters (18-34YOs) at 82/12.
- Party affiliation - Yes, 92% of Republicans support voter ID. So do 76% of independents : and 59% of those wingnutty Democrats in Minnesota, too. Among Tea Party 'members,' voter ID enjoys 93% support. And for those who don't identify with the Tea Party, support plummets all the way to : 74%. Along ideological lines, liberals were least likely to support it - at 67%, the second-lowest level of support among all demographics.
- Education - Surely, support must be coming from the mouthbreathers, right? High-school graduates give a 79% level of support, almost the same as the 78% among those with some college education. Those with degrees are a little more discerning : at 75%.
- Income level - It won't be much of a surprise to know that those making six figures support voter ID 73/25. It will be a surprise to Dayton to find that those making less than $50K per year support it even more, 78/14.
- Region - Like all of the other demographics, there isn't much difference between the Twin Cities demo (76/19) and the rural area of western Minnesota (81/15). In each region, support is at 75% or higher.
Whichever way you slice it, support for Photo ID is strong. The bottom line is that a)voter fraud really exists and b) there's proof that photo ID doesn't disenfranchise voters.
Tags: Photo ID , Voter Fraud , Data Entry , Mark Ritchie , Joe Mansky , Crawford v. Marion County Election Board , Democrats , DFL , SCOTUS , Judge Barker , Elections , Election 2012
Posted Friday, February 3, 2012 6:07 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 03-Feb-12 09:19 AM
I agree wholeheartedly agree that we need voter ID but the republican majority has frittered away their power by banking on a gay marriage amendment that is going to get voted down because no one will come up with a coherent message to combat the pro-gay movement. Meanwhile they tried to get a voter ID bill past the most liberal and divisive governor the state has ever seen and he vetoes the bill. Now the republicans are wasting time trying to get a voter ID amendment on the 2012 ballot which isn't going to solve any voter fraud problems for the 2012 election. Republicans always seem to be playing catch up and can't get a coherent message out to their constituents.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 03-Feb-12 10:07 AM
Chad, The GOP legislature couldn't have gotten the Photo ID on before the 2012 election without Tom Emmer as governor. Better late than never.
Comment 3 by Nick at 04-Feb-12 02:31 PM
I agree with both of you that we need Photo ID for elections. It gives integrity to the elections. Here's what I would like to see with this: State gives the people who want to vote but don't have ID's, FREE ID's, Same day registration and Photo ID made on election day right at the polling place. I would like the GOP legislature take the gay-marriage ban off as a constitutional amendment and instead put voter id on. Voter id has 65% support or better while gay-marriage ban only 48% according to a recent Star-tribune poll. I would also like the legislature to allow all sunday alcohol sales since MN is only of 13 states that doesn't allow hard liquor to be sold on Sundays and one of only 3 states that only allows 3.2 beer to be sold on Sundays.
Comment 4 by Adam at 06-Feb-12 12:51 PM
I wouldn't call myself a progressive, but that's some good "journalism" there putting labels on people you've never even spoken to.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 06-Feb-12 01:22 PM
Progressives are found on both sides of the aisle. The most prominent GOP progressives are Mitt & John McCain.
Potter's decision looking foolish
This morning, I found this tasty tidbit of information about the importance of aviation to the economy:
'This measure is key to advancing the nearly 8 percent of our nation's economy impacted by the aviation industry,' said House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John L. Mica, Florida Republican.
Couple that information with the fact that there's a significant worldwide pilot shortage and it isn't difficult to see that there's a need for accredited collegiate aviation programs. Except if you're Earl Potter. When it comes to President Potter and the soon-to-be-defunct Aviation Department, he's as blind as a bat.
This article was written in 2009. Even then, people were predicting a pilot shortage. It contains these disturbing projections:
For the first five years after 2012 to 2017 we'll see retirement rates of 3% per year at my airline, climbing from 4 to 7% in the following five years and, starting in 2022, up to 10% of our pilots will retire every year until 2027.
Precisely at the time when the need for pilots from accredited programs is increasing, President Potter is eliminating the last accredited Aviation program in Minnesota.
That doesn't fit with Chancellor Rosenstone's publicly stated goals :
For more than 150 years, our colleges and universities have prepared Minnesota's workforce; we have supplied skilled employees for new and growing companies; we have graduated entrepreneurs who have started businesses in every town of our state; and we have educated the Minnesotans who knit together the fabric of our communities, from teachers and social workers to police officers and nurses.
That role cannot diminish in the face of current financial challenges.
Quite the contrary, our role as a driver of Minnesota's economy is more important than ever, and the priorities we set over the next few weeks must enrich the education and lives of our students; must create jobs; and must contribute to the prosperity of businesses and communities across the state.
How is killing a program that's poised to train pilots, air traffic controllers and airport managers fit with Chancellor Rosenstone's edict? How can Minnesota eliminate a program that's likely to create tons of aviators right at the time when airline pilots are retiring at the dramatic rates described above?
Read this statement and tell me there isn't a need for pilots:
Pilots will have the opportunity to learn more about this burgeoning market and be interviewed for positions currently available. Qualified applicants may receive on-the-spot conditional offers for jobs for the following aircraft: The Boeing 777, Boeing 747-400, Boeing 767, Boeing 737NG and EFIS, Airbus A340, Airbus A330, Airbus A320, Embraer EMB190, and Embraer EMB145.
President Potter is shutting down the Aviation Department at the exact time that there's a pilot shortage, a mechanics shortage and private companies are buying their own jets to increase their executives' productivity while travelling.
The thought that Potter's getting paid $300,000+ to make foolish decisions like this is infuriating. I won't attempt to tell people that he hasn't done any good. I'll just attempt to prove that he's gotten alot of big decisions badly wrong.
Thanks to his attitude that he only answers to Chancellor Rosenstone, which technically is true, he's losing respect on campus. If President Potter doesn't change his attitude soon, he'll lose all respect.
If that happens, he will have earned it.
Tags: Earl Potter , SCSU , MnSCU , Chancellor Rosenstone , Pilot Shortage , Air Traffic Controllers , Aviation , Job Fair , China , John Mica , House Transportation Committee , Economy
Posted Friday, February 3, 2012 4:46 PM
Comment 1 by Nick at 04-Feb-12 02:11 PM
St. Cloud State has the ONLY ACCREDITED AVIATION Program in MINNESOTA. MSU-Mankato is NOT Accredited. Gary, check out www.aabi.aero, you'll find a list of accredited aviation programs there, St. Cloud State is one of them that is listed there. In fact, St. Cloud State was one of the FIRST 10 Aviation programs accredited by the Aviation Accreditation Board International.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 04-Feb-12 03:27 PM
If you haven't followed LFR, I've talked extensively about SCSU being accredited & that MSU isn't.
Comment 3 by Tim at 04-Feb-12 11:42 PM
Nick, University of Minnesota- Crookston has an accredited program (I'm going through it ;).
Comment 4 by Patrick at 05-Feb-12 05:33 AM
Tim and Nick
The accreditation that Gary refers to is Aviation Accreditation Board International (AABI) http://www.aabi.aero/ - as you can see on the web site that neither Mankato nor Crookston have this designation. Yes all three schools are accredited regionally via the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association but SCSU is the only one to hold the program designation. This will be crucial as graduates from the AABI schools will most likely qualify for right-seat airline pilot consideration at half the time (800 flight hours) as other candidates (1,500 hours). Also SCSU has an FAA recognized air traffic control program that offers those graduates consideration for employment.
How do I know this - I taught in the SCSU Aviation program for over 20 years. Today SCSU Aviation graduates are pilots for the regional and major airlines, plus corporate and military pilots, controllers at the busiest airports and managing all levels of airport and airline operations. What Gary has detailed about President Potter's decision to close a very successful program is accurate in my opinion.
Comment 5 by Patrick at 05-Feb-12 05:35 AM
Nick
My post was for Tim, I put your name in there by mistake. You seem to understand the whole AABI program accreditation.
Comment 6 by Darlene at 06-Feb-12 08:46 AM
I have not talked to one person in the St. Cloud community who agrees with Mr. Potter on this issue. The citizens of this town, and even professors I have talked to, who have nothing to do with the aviation department, feel it's an extremely bad decision and are upset about it, how it impacts St. Cloud, and about Mr. Potter saying he doesn't owe us (the taxpayers and the community in which SCSU is located) any consideration when making decisions.
He admitted he made the decision based on "facts" that were incorrect (he had the wrong figure on how many students were enrolled in the program), but he still would not admit he was wrong and change his decision. It takes a man of great character to admit, especially publicly, that he made a bad decision. But he would have gained tremendous respect if had done that. It also requires his superiors to be of high quality to over-ride his bad decisions.
However, we seem to have a lack of quality people in these positions, for which we are paying with hard-earned tax dollars, and it is once again "government-as-usual" and "government-as-we-have-come-to-expect", a system where people are paid too much, are not held accountable for their decisions, and the people in authority over Mr. Potter covering up for him...very convenient for all involved, except for the people of whom the government is supposed to be made up...the people, we have to put up with it.
A sad day for St. Cloud and for America that this kind of situation is allowed to happen!!! I'm disappointed in our legislators for doing nothing about it to this point, and I'm extremely disappointed in Chancellor Rosenstone for not fulfilling his pledge to hold college presidents accountable, once again, politics as usual, lots of promises that SOUND so good, give us hope, and have no substance.
Response 6.1 by Gary Gross at 06-Feb-12 09:18 AM
Darlene, I'm the only person who's covered this story. I've been accused of fighting to keep my friend, Jeff Johnson's, government job, which is supposedly a cardinal sin. President Potter has told people that I've gotten my facts mixed up.
That's ok. I've got a thick hide. I can take it.
The things I've quoted Potter as saying are on video. If he'd like to argue that the videos that show him flipping from one excuse to another as to why he's decided to eliminated the Aviation Department aren't what he really said, I wish him the best of luck. He'll need it.
It's past time that he decided which lie he'll permanently settle on. He's been exposed as not being trustworthy. More importantly, he's been exposed as making some terrible decisions, decisions that aren't worthy of his exalted salary. If he wants that exhorbitant salarry, i's time he stepped forward & earned it. He hasn't thus far.
During my time studying Potter, it's clear that he's the master of grand gestures & empty promises. He isn't a trustworthy public servant anymore because he's disinterested in the public. That's why Potter's gotta go ASAP.
Comment 7 by pilotguru at 06-Feb-12 01:40 PM
TIM PLEASE READ! To the earlier comments: Here are ALL the aviation programs in MN, as of Dec. 2010.
1. St.Cloud State University (4 year) ACCREDITED
2. Academy College (2 year) NOT ACCREDITED
3. Anoke-Technical (Classes Only) NOT ACCREDITED
4. University of MN - Crookston (4 Year) NOT ACCREDITED (UND Satellite School, accreditation is lost, because of the lack of classes offered at the UMN campus regarding aviation, for ACCREDITED degree go to the MAIN CAMPUS UND).
5. MN State University - Mankato (4 year) NOT ACCREDITED
6. Winona State University (??) and NOT ACCREDITED
we had many other 2 year programs in MN in the past 15 years and one by one they have been getting cut "because of budget reasons, lack of enrollment.." and SCSU is one of them...
I done 1 year at UMN-Crookston and 5 years at UND, and I will assure you that UMN-Crookston is not accredited, because of the classes not being offered that are required for accreditation, i.e. Crew Resource Management course in a Jet/Turboprop FTD, and the broad range of courses, also enrollment at UMN is an issue with regards to accreditation. I'm summarizing my discussions I've had with various faculty from UMN-Crookston. So yes, Tim you CAN go to UND for training i.e. multi-engine, crj sim whatever, but it doesn't mean the UMN-CROOKSTON program is accredited, that is why it's called "UND SATELLITE SCHOOL", but it loses accreditation because it's a program made for you to transfer to the Main campus, and doesn't offer the variety of courses.
I hope this sheds light on this discussion. If you need further clarification, please see WAYNE MODA at the Crookston Airport, director of flight operations for UMN-Crookston.
Comment 8 by pilotguru at 06-Feb-12 01:49 PM
I do apologize I forgot 2 additional aviation schools,
7. Northland Community & Technical College (2 year)
8. Lake Superior Community College (2 year)
If you hear of any more go ahead and post them...
Comment 9 by Darlene at 06-Feb-12 04:27 PM
Thanks, Gary, you're doing a great job!!! And I know your heart - you do not deserve any criticism from a man like Earl Potter. If I were him, I certainly would not accuse others of having their facts mixed up. Maybe, since he has thrown out this accusation, you and he should have a public debate, one which I would certainly attend, and you can both lay your facts out on the table. I doubt he has the fortitude to face you with his "facts!" I'm sorry that you are the only one who has the courage to take on this issue, but I appreciate your doing so!!!
Comment 10 by Nick at 06-Feb-12 08:01 PM
Pilotguru, Winona State only has a minor in aviation. George Bolon, the guy who ran their program, recently retired. I went there before transferring to St. Cloud State.
Comment 11 by Jethro at 07-Feb-12 03:21 PM
In looking at videos, radio interviews, and newspaper articles, even the casual observer can see that Potter can't keep his story straight.
