January 11-13, 2014
Jan 11 02:32 Gov. Dayton, MNsure & Sgt. Schultz Jan 11 03:45 Rep. Davids: MNsure is the DFL's mess Jan 12 08:39 The DFL's PR nightmare Jan 13 02:27 Ugly truth of SCSU's enrollment decline Jan 13 10:45 DFL chanting points target Fox, TEA Party Jan 13 11:45 Is Michigan in play?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Gov. Dayton, MNsure & Sgt. Schultz
According to this article , Gov. Dayton insists that he didn't learn of MNsure's problems and contract changes until after the launch:
Gov. Mark Dayton said Friday that he first learned at least six months later of controversial contract changes made by the state's health exchange. He said he also didn't know about the serious technical issues plaguing MNsure until after the exchange's Oct. 1 launch.First, it's painfully obvious that Gov. Dayton floats through life oblivious to what's happening around him. This crisis, Gov. Dayton insists that he didn't know about the technical issues tormenting potential MNsure users or that significant changes of responsibilities had been made through new contracts with vendors.
This fits Gov. Dayton's pattern of being ignorant of what's happening around him. Gov. Dayton said he didn't know that the Tax Bill he signed and negotiated included expanding the sales tax to farm equipment repairs:
He certainly didn't mind signing the farm equipment repair sales tax increase into law. It wasn't until he got to FarmFest that he reversed course.That's nothing compared with Gov. Dayton's supposed surprise that the Vikings Stadium bill had a provision in it for the Vikings to sell personal seat licenses , aka PSLs:
"I strongly oppose shifting any part of the team's responsibility for those costs onto Minnesota Vikings fans," he said in his letter. "This private contribution is your responsibility, not theirs. I said this new stadium would be a 'People's Stadium,' not a 'Rich People's Stadium.' I meant it then, and I mean it now."Nothing happened in terms of blocking the sale of the Vikings PSLs because Gov. Dayton didn't have a political or legal leg to stand on:
By contract, seat licenses would be sold by the public stadium authority, which is run by one of Dayton's former top staffers. Dayton said he would ask the authority not to sell seat licenses, and he plans to ask the Legislature, if necessary, to press his case and block their sale.
The Vikings said in a statement Tuesday, Nov. 13, that they were disappointed with Dayton's letter. The team said the letter "does not recognize a key component of the stadium agreement struck by the Vikings, state and local leaders this past spring."
Gov. Dayton, that's three strikes. Hopefully, this time next year, you'll be out of office and a real leader will be in office, one who actually pays attention to the things he's signing.
It's pretty pathetic that Gov. Dayton signed the exchange into law, then ignored it after that. He wasn't aware that data security wasn't a priority with the MNsure board. He defintely wasn't aware that changes had been made to the contracts involving the building of the MNsure portal.
Here's the first thing I'm reminded of in reading the article:
Minnesota needs a leader, not a well-known figurehead. We definitely don't need a modern day Sgt. Schultz. Unfortunately, we've got the latter, not the former.
Posted Saturday, January 11, 2014 2:41 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 11-Jan-14 11:56 AM
Gary:
Who ever the Republican nominee for Governor is they will have to repeat one point time after time.
"I will make a point of knowing what is in the bill before I sign it because Governor Dayton doesn't care!"
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Rep. Davids: MNsure is the DFL's mess
Greg Davids' op-ed didn't mince words in going after the DFL's MNsure debacle:
Thissen calls MNsure "health-care reform," but in reality, it is nothing more than a health-care nightmare. According to the MNsure board of directors, fewer than 10,000 households have submitted payment for plans that they've applied for through MNsure. This is far short of the 100,000 Thissen claimed will be covered through the program beginning this month.
Rep. Davids then laid blame for MNsure's failures squarely at the DFL's doorstep:
I've had dozens of constituents tell me they now are being forced into a new policy they do not like, and do not want, because of Thissen's Democratic cohorts shoving MNsure down our throats.
This isn't the DFL legislature's mess just because they passed the legislation. It's the Democrats' mess because they willfully resisted holding oversight hearings while Republicans on the MNsure Legislative Oversight Committee registered complaints about data security and systemic mismanagement.
Rep. Atkins and Sen. Lourey refused to hold oversight hearings because they didn't want to have MNsure executives answer Sen. Sean Nienow's and Sen. Michelle Benson's questions. If Democrats held oversight hearings, then MNsure's problems would've been exposed at a time when Democrats were bragging about how smooth MNsure was running.
MNsure is a ticking time bomb and the DFL knows it. They know that it might take down Gov. Dayton's administration. They know that it might take out the DFL's majority in the House. They know it because Rep. Davids asked these difficult questions:
Who is fighting for those Minnesotans who were kicked off their health insurance plans? Has anyone heard a word from Gov. Mark Dayton or our DFL legislative leadership as to how they're going to solve this problem?
Thus far, all I've heard from the DFL is that we've got the cheapest insurance prices in the nation. Apparently, they think that chanting point is all they need to dodge this MNsure bullet. They're wrong about that.
Brian McClung exposed the folly of that tactic when he obliterated Denise Cardinal in a debate over that very subject. McClung admitted that Minnesota has the cheapest rates in the nation, then highlighted the fact that Minnesota's prices jumped significantly when transitioning from what we had into MNsure prices. Then McClung stuck the proverbial dagger in and gave it a twist by adding that deductibles had jumped, too, making the ACA not that affordable for Minnesotans.
Rep. Davids threw this paragraph in for emphasis on the Democrats' Plan B:
Thissen himself said we all should be pulling for MNsure to get better. Unfortunately, that is probably going to be his plan for next session - doing nothing but hoping that things will improve. Sitting around expecting this program will heal itself is not acceptable, not to those who continue to struggle to register for coverage and not to those who were basically ordered to pay higher premiums and higher deductibles.
That isn't much of a magical elixir for Minnesota's health insurance difficulties.
Posted Saturday, January 11, 2014 3:45 AM
No comments.
The DFL's PR nightmare
One of the things coming out of the MNsure debacle is that the DFL legislature, especially the MNsure Legislative Oversight Committee's co-chairs, ran interference for Gov. Dayton. The MNsure scandal will be the DFL's defeat next November, thanks in no small part to the legislative auditor's investigation into why the launch failed, who knew in advance it would fail and why the MNsure Board didn't alert Gov. Dayton or the Oversight Committee.
These aren't tiny things. They can't be categorized as glitches, either. These are major problems that should've been reported even though they'd cause political damage. GOP Sen. Sean Nienow raised questions back in September about MNsure's data security. GOP Sen. Michelle Benson raised questions about MNsure's priorities, questioning April Todd-Malmlov's management abilities.
Prior to a committee meeting in September, Sen. Nienow said that he had 40 questions about data security. At the meeting, Ms. Todd-Malmlov said she didn't have the answers to Sen. Nienow's question. Instead, she promised to get the answers for him. Three months later, she kept her promise. It isn't likely she would've kept her promise if it wasn't for the fact that KSTP was going to run an article about data security that night.
Sen. Benson questioned Ms. Todd-Malmlov's priorities. Specifically, she asked why Ms. Todd-Malmlov started the MNsure ad campaign before she put the training programs in place or made sure the sensitive data was secured. That's proof of Ms. Todd-Malmlov's incompetence.
Unfortunately, incompetence isn't the reason why Oversight Committee co-chairs Rep. Joe Atkins and Sen. Tony Lourey didn't hold hearings in October, November and December. The problems that Sen. Nienow worried about in September came to fruition in October. Worst of all, they weren't fixed in November or December.
Meanwhile, Rep. Atkins appeared on several shows, including the Capitol Report in September and Almanac in December. In fact, during his September appearance on Capitol report, he said he was confident everything would work well when MNsure launched.
Rep. Atkins' happy talk might buy the DFL a little time to get MNsure running but it won't buy them much time to fix MNsure. Meanwhile, Minnesotans will be upset that the Democrats' happy talk was meant to buy political cover for Gov. Dayton. Most importantly, Minnesotans don't like major problems being swept under the rug. They'd rather know that the problems are getting fixed.
Apparently, Democrats, whether it's Ms. Todd-Malmlov, Rep. Atkins, Sen. Lourey or Gov. Dayton think it's more important to start the PR machine than to get the essentials fixed. The DFL's decision to work on MNsure's PR campaign rather than get MNsure working tells Minnesotans that their priorities aren't right.
Minnesotans deserve things that work, not things with cute commmercials.
Posted Sunday, January 12, 2014 8:39 AM
No comments.
Ugly truth of SCSU's enrollment decline
An Ugly Fact about SCSU's Enrollment Decline!
by Silence Dogood
The Office of Strategy, Planning and Effectiveness at SCSU maintains a website that is available to the public (http://www.stcloudstate.edu/ospe/research/data.asp). Some very interesting data is stored at the site. Using data from SCSU's Office of Strategy, Planning and Effectiveness website, the following plot of Fall semester enrollments is obtained:
The growth (1,490 students) in headcount from Fall'07 to Fall'10 is amazing! The decline (2,074 students) from Fall'10 to Fall'13 is shocking! Remember this data is from the university's publically available data.
Enrollment and changes in enrollment at a university are very complex subjects. However, some data just does not need a complex explanation. Consider the SCSU enrollment trend when the numbers of New Entering Freshmen (NEF) in the fall semesters of 2007 through 2013 are plotted:
After being essentially unchanged over a three year period (Fall'07 2,380, Fall '08 2,401 Fall'09 2,390), the NEF enrollment began to drop. Over the last four years, Fall'10 thru Fall'13, 687 fewer (28.7% fewer) NEF enrolled than in Fall'09 (2390-1703=687)! This decline is especially troubling when you understand that a student who is not enrolled as a freshmen is not then able to be retained as a sophomore, junior, and senior. As a result, the decline in NEF will have an impact on the overall enrollment for at least three if not four more years!
The administration announced on September 5, 2013, that it had decreased the number of students admitted to the university in the Academic College Excellence (ACE) program by 160 students [The ACE program provides access to higher education for students who do not meet the admission standards to the university]. The fall semester ACE enrollment decline was 246 students so the "unplanned" decline was at least 86 students a 53.8% error in estimated decline. What do you think the university's response would have been--if the NEF enrollment error was in the other direction and 86 non ACE students unexpectedly enrolled? Partying on the second floor the Administrative Services building? A news release announcing the good news prepared? Or silent acceptance?
But maybe things aren't as bad as it looks because the shortfall in NEF is being made up by New Entering Transfer students (NET)? The enrollment trend for NET in the fall semesters of 2007 thru 2013 are plotted:
From a high of 1,477 in Fall'07 to the low of 1,072 in Fall'13 is a drop of 405 students or 27.4%! This decline is small each year but in total the decline means NET can't make up for the short fall in NEF enrollments. In fact NET enrollment has a significantly smaller base compared to NEF (for Fall '13 the differences is 631). To have made up for the loss in NEF enrollments from 2009-2013, the NET enrollment would have to have been 122% higher than it was.
While the total decrease in the numbers of NETs is less than the decrease in NEF, the percentage decrease in NET is almost the same as the percentage decrease in NEF. So if the NEF are down by 28.7% and the NET are down 27.4%, how can the university enrollment headcount only be down 11.3% from Fall'10 to Fall'13? This is an excellent question!
The answer to the headcount question is - Post Secondary Education Option (PSEO) students. Every category of students is down significantly over the past three years except the numbers of PSEO students. The following plot shows the fall enrollment of PSEO students at SCSU from Fall 2005 through Fall 2013:
The growth in the numbers of students involved in the PSEO program is nothing less than spectacular!
The Minnesota Legislature created the Post-Secondary Enrollment Option (PSEO) program in 1985, allowing high school juniors and seniors while still in high school to earn college credit. Were it not for the 265% increase in PSEO enrollment from Fall'05 through Fall'13, the enrollment at SCSU would be making national headlines for its spectacular decline. As it is, the PSEO enrollment growth masks the declines in NEF, NET, International, and graduate enrollments.
It is quite easy to demonstrate the impact of the PSEO students on the enrollment by calculating the percentage of the total enrollment due to PSEO students:
One can only hope the Minnesota Legislature doesn't eliminate or restrict the PSEO opportunities for high school students. If they do, almost 20% of the enrollment at SCSU could disappear overnight.
While it may not be as big a concern to the university that 20% it's student body is still in high school, it should be to Greater St. Cloud since PSEO students do not have much of a financial impact on the Greater St. Cloud economy. At most, these students come to campus only once a semester and many of the PSEO students do not come to campus at all. As a result, the decline in traditional on-campus enrollment should be causing the community wonder how big a drag on the local community SCSU's decline is today and into the future. Remember PSEO students do not rent apartments or buy gas or groceries, eat out, go to movies and concerts from local businesses. Essentially, to the local community, the enrollment at SCSU is at least (remember online and off campus enrollments, and those missing NEF and NET's also do not come to campus) 3,500 students or 20% less than the published enrollment number. Not being an economist, I can't tell you the exact economic impact. However, it doesn't take an economist to know that the economic impact of 3,500 fewer students in a college town is significant.
The ugly fact is the shift in the enrollment mix, more PSEO fewer NEF and NET, means that SCSU's declining enrollment is and increasingly will create negative economic consequences for the community. Should the community be aware and concerned about these changes?
Posted Monday, January 13, 2014 2:27 AM
Comment 1 by Wonderer at 13-Jan-14 08:35 AM
Dear Mayor, City Council, St Cloud Times, and citizens of the St Cloud Area. Wake up. Although St Cloud and the surrounding area seems eager to expand its economic base, here is one that has been taken for granted for decades and now is shrinking under our eyes. WHY does our local newspaper claim a priority on investigative reporting, writing long feature articles, yet ignoring the administrative and enrollment difficulties at SCSU? Times, you are being handed real data, with cited public sources (not unfounded allegations) on a silver platter which should provoke your reporting sense and make investigation so easy for you. There are people at SCSU who have devoted their careers to their work and the institution (not just faculty members) - these people as well as businesses in the community are your clientele. There are thousands of loyal alumni whose institution is eroding. Why are you avoiding this situation? Not even a sniff? How can the local economy plan and adjust to this major influence if they aren't informed?
Comment 2 by Crimson Trace at 13-Jan-14 08:59 AM
This jumped off the page: However, it doesn't take an economist to know that the economic impact of 3,500 fewer students in a college town is significant.
No kidding. The economic impact will certainly hurt The city. I sure would hate to be a property owner near SCSU. Where is the MnSCU chancellor? Why aren't the local legislators asking questions and demanding answers? Rep. Zach Dorholt is the vice chair on the higher education and policy committee. http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/comm/committeemembers.asp?comm=88016
How bad does it have to get before these people wake up? How many millions of dollars will leave St. Cloud? Are the politicians serious about economic development or is it just a catchy talking point during the campaign season? Inquiring minds want to know.
Comment 3 by Patrick-M at 13-Jan-14 10:32 AM
After seeing this data I am wondering how the state to the east is faring. Perhaps the University of Wisconsin System schools are experiencing similar enrollment decrease. Not really - according to this data dated available to the public, the Fact Book - University of Wisconsin System http://www.uwsa.edu/opar/ssb/2013-14pre/prelim.htm shows 2006-2013 enrollments have stabilized or increased for Eau Claire, La Crosse, Oshkosh, Stevens Point, Stout and Whitewater (those would be similar in mission to SCSU).
What say you St. Cloud Times? how about some real investigative reporting for a change!
Comment 4 by Prefer Anonymous at 13-Jan-14 01:41 PM
It seems that, in the time frame that is being discussed, the ND system has lost roughly 10,000 headcount from 2010-2013. Down from a high of 55k to 45k this fall. While the decline in the UW system isn't as bad, the western campuses aren't as stable as the eastern (again, this is a gross generalization). The same is seen within the MN higher ed system as well, with the western campuses shedding enrollment faster than the eastern campuses.
I personally have heard the administration discussing these issues, as I'm sure silence has (it is clear that silence is an "insider"). It is indeed a complex environment, one that I've heard administration talk about even during Saigo's time. It's odd to me that silence would accuse the administration of malfeasance in this regard, as the warning signs have been consciously articulated by the administration now spanning two Presidents.
CNN recently had a map that showed a ratio between "moves out" and "moves in" - it tracked people either moving into a state or out of. MN and ND were both below 50% moving in.
The ugly truth is that MN's college aged population is declining. I don't hear the administration denying this or trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes in this regard.
Comment 5 by frank at 14-Jan-14 04:12 PM
Prefer Annonymous: What?! You are saying that North Dakota has a low move in rate below 50%. Of course, you forgot to mention where they compare to the other states. For all we know they might be at the top of the list with a move in rate of 50 %. North Dakota has no income tax. North Dakota has some of the best paying jobs in the Upper Midwest. Their employment rate is almost nil. North Dakota's economy is thriving. In fact, it is one of the best in the nation. So gimme more information, Mr Annonymous. and yes I know, you are clearly a Mr. So we are looking for facts and figures. When did CNN air this report? Who was the reporter? And where did they get their information? Details man. We want details! I anxiously await your reply.
DFL chanting points target Fox, TEA Party
If Republicans want to know what they should expect during the upcoming campaign season, they don't have to look further than this deceitful DFL LTE . It's stunning that an LTE didn't get a single major point right. Check this out:
It promulgated the debunked claim that the Internal Revenue Service targeted tea party groups. Even Fox News was forced to admit this as false: Both liberal and conservative groups were targeted by a policy implemented by a Republican IRS administrator, and only one liberal group was denied the tax-exempt status it sought.
That's an outright lie. It started as the administration's spin, then was proven wrong. Then the administration's allies in Congress insisted that it was the truth after testimony proved it false. This article highlights how mistaken this liberal editorialist is:
IG report, May 14: The briefing paper noted that the Determinations Unit sent cases that met any of the criteria below to a designated team of specialists to be worked:
- 'Tea Party,' 'Patriots,' or '9/12 Project' is referenced in the case file.
- Issues include Government spending, Government debt, or taxes.
- Education of the public via advocacy/lobbying to 'make America a better place to live.'
- Statements in the case file criticize how the country is being run.
Over 100 applications were identified by this time. It was decided to develop a guide sheet for processing these cases.The IRS Inspector General's report is the definitive report on who was targeted. Those bullet points don't point to additional scrutiny for any progressive organizations.
Then there's this chanting point:
On the Benghazi consulate attack, the letter stated, 'Obama blamed (it) on a video.' Funny, because so did the New York Times as recently as December. Although the event was tragic, no right-wing conspiracy theory has panned out.
That isn't funny. It's sad that the NY Times would peddle that lie after Libya's president called it a terrorist attack right before Susan Rice lied to Face the Nation's Bob Schieffer. Then there's this report :
When the CIA personnel were asked for their reaction to the administration's initial explanation that an anti-Islam video and a demonstration gone awry were to blame for the attack, Fox News is told they were seething with anger because everything on the ground, from their perspective, showed it was a premeditated attack .
At least three of the five, who were all in Benghazi, responded to the scene that night. The witnesses testified that five mortars rained down on the annex in less than a minute. They pointed to those details as more evidence of a professionally trained team, describing the attack on the annex as akin to a professional hit on the operation in order to drive it out of Benghazi.
Summarizing things briefly, eyewitnesses to the attack described the team as "professionally trained" and the attack as "a premeditated attack."
The lies didn't stop there. Here's more:
The letter claimed Obama lied when he said if you like your insurance you can keep it. I'll tell you what: I'll admit Obama lied if the letter-writer agrees Obama lied to less than 1 percent of policy holders; the other 99-plus percent will see no change or better coverage under the Affordable Care Act.
First, the cancellations that've gone into effect thus far are just the first wave of cancellations. They aren't the end of the cancellations by any stretch of the imagination. When people receive the other cancellations, everyone will know that the vast majority of people will have been lied to. Next, policies that give 28-year-olds coverage for ambulatory care or that give 60-year-old men pregnancy coverage aren't better policies. I'm reflexively suspicious of governments ordering me to do something.
I'd rather have families, in consultation with their physicians, making those decisions. Leftists insist that abortions are so personal that they should be determined by the woman and her doctor. Then they insist that something as personal as determining what coverages a family should have should be determined by Congress and the secretary of HHS. Doesn't that strike anyone as being totally inconsistent?
Finally, the Duluth News Tribune's editorial page editor should apologize for publishing an LTE that's this free of facts. Mr. Johnson's statements weren't stated as opinions. His words were put in the form of statements of facts. As I showed, they're actually spin, aka outright lies.
Posted Monday, January 13, 2014 10:45 AM
No comments.
Is Michigan in play?
This polling from Michigan shows Democrats might have an impossible task on their hands in keeping control of the Senate:
RCP Average 9/7 - 1/8
Land (R) 39.4, Peters (D) 38.8 Land leads by .6%
Harper (R) 1/7 - 1/8
1004 LV
Land 44%, Peters 36; Land leads by 8%
PPP (D) 12/5 - 12/8
1034 RV
Land 42%, Peters 40%; Land leads by 2%
If Democrats have to fight to hold Carl Levin's seat in Michigan, they're in trouble. If they don't hold Levin's seat this November, they'll lose control of the Senate. The national landscape isn't helping Democrats this year. It doesn't help Democrats that they're fighting off the image that they can't be trusted.
It wasn't just President Obama who lied about people keeping their health insurance plan if they liked it. Lots of Democratic senators repeated that, too.
Friday's jobs report hurt Democrats, too, although not for the reason most would think. Having 535,000 people quit looking for a job is the biggest indictment against Obamanomics. All of the Democrats that are up for re-election this year voted for President Obama's budget blueprint.
If Michigan is in play, what does that say about Montana, Louisiana, West Virginia, New Hampshire, Colorado, South Dakota, Arkansas and Alaska? Is Minnesota in play? It's already shaping up to be a very pro-GOP election cycle. It'll be interesting to see what happens.
Posted Monday, January 13, 2014 11:45 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 13-Jan-14 07:52 PM
Gary:
The problem we will have for six years is a bunch of democrat senators survived which should've been gone. We're talking OH, MT, WI, ND, MI, MO, and PA for starters. Fortunately this is the class of 2008 that Obama helped to sweep in when he won in 2008. The voters are likely to take out on the democrat senators.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Patrick-M at 13-Jan-14 08:22 PM
How vulnerable is Franken? Never did like him as an actor and even less as a Senator. (by-the-way who is counting the votes this time?)
