June 14-16, 2016
Jun 14 03:56 Tragedy hits SCSU Jun 14 04:54 Dorholt's special interest history Jun 14 09:27 CentraCare crucifix confusion Jun 15 10:47 Bonding bill basics, blather Jun 15 17:30 Rubio will reconsider Senate run Jun 16 02:51 Transportation brawls shaping up Jun 16 06:40 DFL losing the outstate PR battle Jun 16 12:06 Constitution 1, environmentalists 0 Jun 16 15:08 Legislative pretender update
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Tragedy hits SCSU
I've written lots of critical things about SCSU President Earl Potter over the last 4 years. People think that my comments were grounded in hatred for him. That was never the case. I wrote the things I wrote because I was critical of his actions and his decisions. Just moments ago, I saw this statement from MnSCU Chancellor Steven Rosenstone:
My sincere condolences to President Potter's family, especially to his wife Christine.
Posted Tuesday, June 14, 2016 3:56 AM
No comments.
Dorholt's special interest history
It isn't difficult to read between the lines of Zach Dorholt's op-ed . It's clear that he, like Rep. Thissen and Gov. Dayton, long for the days when the DFL ruled everything in St. Paul. It would be a major mistake to return to that situation. It's a recipe for disaster. It was a disaster then, too.
Let's look at the Thissen-Dorholt-DFL 'accomplishments'. They raised taxes by $2,200,000,000. The DFL promised property tax relief. We got the additional taxes. We didn't get the property tax relief. In fact, the DFL touted their historic investment in education. A year later, the school districts in Princeton and St. Cloud enacted major property tax increases. What's worse, they raised property taxes without bringing the increase before voters.
The last time that the DFL ran St. Paul, Rep. Thissen, Rep. Dorholt and the DFL ignored the dozens of in-home child care providers. Instead, Rep. Thissen, Rep. Dorholt and the DFL listened to AFSCME and the SEIU. As a result, they passed a forced unionization bill that Gov. Dayton then signed. The in-home child care providers, which are small businesses, told them they'd reject unionization, didn't get a say in the matter because the DFL is a wholly owned subsidiary of the public employee unions.
When it came time to vote, in-home child care providers sent a loud message to the DFL and their special interest masters . They rejected AFSCME's and the SEIU's representation, with 1,014 child care providers voting against unionization and 392 child care providers voting for unionization. Jennifer Parrish summed it up perfectly:
We know that over the 10 years that we've been working on this that child-care providers are hands down overwhelmingly opposed to this. They were waiting by their mailboxes just so they could have an opportunity to vote no. Family child-care providers are small business owners. We set our own rates, we create our own working conditions, all the things that unions typically negotiate for, we determine for ourselves.
The point is that Dorholt and the DFL don't listen to anyone except their special interest puppeteers.
This statement is particularly insulting:
My commitment: I will always put the public good above the appeals of powerful special interests. The people of Minnesota deserve much better than what we have now.
This special interest flier says that Dorholt isn't honest:
It's worth noting that I didn't get a single lit piece from Dorholt's campaign. I got tons of lit pieces and mailers from special interest organizations like Working America advocating for Dorholt. Isn't it interesting that the man who's pledging to "always put the public good above the appeals of powerful special interests" had 2 Minnesota contributors to his campaign? BTW, both of those contributors weren't from his district.
Dorholt put the public employee unions, the environmental activists and the DFL's bosses ahead of the public good. He voted 100% with Twin Cities DFL legislators. Zach Dorholt was too busy paying attention to the public employee unions, the environmental activists and the DFL's bosses to notice he doesn't represent the Twin Cities. Dorholt didn't notice that the Twin Cities' needs are different than the needs of HD-14B.
That's because Zach Dorholt's commitment is to the DFL, not the people of HD-14B.
Posted Tuesday, June 14, 2016 4:54 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 15-Jun-16 06:00 AM
Nice item.
Is he the incumbent, or the challenger?
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Jun-16 10:11 AM
Dorholt was the incumbent going into the 2014 election. Then Jim Knoblach defeated him. Now, it's a rematch.
Comment 2 by DaveM at 15-Jun-16 01:36 PM
Since Dorholt has no control over what Working America does or does not do - it is hard to use that as evidence that Dorholt is beholden to special interests.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Jun-16 03:02 PM
Actually, it isn't. Had you followed this race closely, which I did, you'd know that Dorholt's 'campaign' didn't put out more than a couple lit pieces. Almost all of the pro-Dorholt lit pieces, and there were upwards of a dozen lit pieces, were put out by special interest organizations like Working America. Had you followed this race closely, which I did, you'd know that there wasn't really a Dorholt campaign. Technically, there was but not in reality.
It's only fitting since Dorholt had a 100% voting record, or very close to it, for each of the DFL's special interest allies.
CentraCare crucifix confusion
This St. Cloud Times article talks about damage done to crucifixes hung on the walls of rooms at the St. Cloud Hospital and CentraCare Clinic. It starts by saying "CentraCare Health is addressing what it calls inaccurate information circulating in the community regarding damage to crucifixes at St. Cloud Hospital. A recent blog post claimed that 'well over 100 crucifixes' have been destroyed at the hospital in the last two years and blamed members of St. Cloud's Somali community. In a written statement to the Times, Jeanine Nistler, spokeswoman for the hospital, said 50 crucifixes have been broken in the past year, some as the result of accidents and some due to vandalism."
It's interesting that the article starts off by calling attention to "what it calls inaccurate information circulating in the community", then doesn't totally refute the claim. I checked into the information in the story with a friend of mine that works at CentraCare, who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity. I was told that Hospital security has known about this for years and that "this issue goes back a fair number of years. They have been trashing crucifixes at the hospital since they first arrived."
Further, I was told that "it got to the point that maintenance decided to start screwing them to the wall to prevent vandalism" and that this happened "when Terry Nystrom was the maintenance director." Later, a decision was made by management to stop nailing the crucifixes to the wall." Apparently, they made the decision, knowing that they'd have to "spend money on replacing them." The article continues:
"When possible, hospital staff have followed up with the individuals and have had fruitful conversations resulting in greater understanding between the hospital and members of the local Muslim community," Nistler wrote. "Muslims are coming to understand the significance of the crucifix and Catholics' respect for it. Likewise, in our conversations with them, we are learning about their faith and culture."
Notice that Somali Muslims had to be told to be respectful of religious articles. As a Christian, I wouldn't need to be told not to destroy Muslim religious symbols if I visited a Muslim nation. That's part of being respectful of others who aren't like you.
Apparently, Somali Muslims aren't taught to respect those who aren't like them.
Posted Tuesday, June 14, 2016 9:27 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 14-Jun-16 07:21 PM
A religion of peace. Right. And we keep letting more and more in unchecked and we are starting to reap what we sow for not being a little more vigilant.
Comment 2 by eric z at 15-Jun-16 05:58 AM
Respect atheists. Voodoo dolls.
Come on Gary. Rome's burning . . .
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Jun-16 10:12 AM
I know Rome's burning. I'm worried about the haters from Somalia that lit the match.
Comment 3 by Bob J. at 15-Jun-16 02:41 PM
Islam is the only religion in the world which demands that non-adherents accept its core tenets.
It's almost like they're atheists in that regard.
Bonding bill basics, blather
Yesterday, negotiators from the Minnesota House and Senate theoretically met in the hopes of hammering out a bonding bill agreement. That wasn't the DFL's goal. DFL senators, led by Jeff Hayden , blamed Republicans for not getting the bonding bill passed.
The DFL used the same misleading arguments they've been using since the DFL Senate sabotaged a bill that had broad bipartisan support. Here's what's important to know. The House passed a $1,000,000,000 bonding bill without funding for SWLRT. SWLRT funding wasn't part of the agreement reached by Speaker Daudt and Sen. Bakk. Simply put, it didn't have the votes to pass in the House.
Key questions: Why does the DFL insist on pushing a controversial project that didn't have the votes to pass? Isn't that a definition of insanity? Isn't that what you'd do if you wanted to prevent a bill from passing while blaming the other side for your obstruction?
Another tactic that the FL is using to deflect criticism from Gov. Dayton's veto of the tax bill is talk about the $100,000,000 drafting error. The minute Gov. Dayton brought it up, Speaker Daudt agreed to fix it the minute a special session was called. Problem solved, right? In Sanityville, yes. In Dayton-DFLville, that molehill turned into a mountain. At least, that's how some of Twin Cities media are playing it.
Simply put, Gov. Dayton vetoed a tax bill that a) provided tax relief to farmers, small businesses, students will college loan debt, veterans and parents saving for their kids' college education and b) passed 178-22 in the House and Senate.
Key question: Doesn't real leadership accept yes for an answer and move onto bonding bill negotiations?
Gov. Dayton and the DFL aren't about fixing things, though. Their word salad automatically talks about 'bringing people together' and 'making progress'. The DFL never talks about fixing problems. The DFL doesn't talk about doing the right thing.
There's a reason for that. The DFL doesn't want to get to a point where things are running smoothly. The DFL doesn't want to fix things. If that happened, people might expect that. If that happened, people might notice that they prefer limited government that gets the important things right all the time and worries about peripheral things once they've gotten the important things right. The day that that happens is the day that progressives are out of a job.
The DFL's whining is aimed at one thing: regaining control of the House so they control state government again. Thoughtful people should reject that possibility ASAP. The last time the DFL ran St. Paul, taxes got raised, including property taxes, spending went through the roof and they checked off tons of things from their special interest allies' wish lists.
As a result, capitol flight accelerated and young, productive, people left the state at a greater rate. If losing the border battle brain drain sounds appealing, vote DFL. If you want statewide prosperity, vote GOP. It's that simple.
Posted Wednesday, June 15, 2016 10:47 AM
Comment 1 by Bob J. at 15-Jun-16 02:38 PM
"Why does the DFL insist on pushing a controversial project that didn't have the votes to pass?"
__
Because they know they're dealing with Republicans, who have a maddening tendency to cave in. Now is the time for Daudt to hold the line.
Comment 2 by JerryE9 at 15-Jun-16 08:15 PM
It would be great if all this ridiculous blaming game were to backfire and the GOP took over the MN Senate.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 16-Jun-16 05:59 AM
Jerry, I think that's entirely possible. The DFL will face some fierce headwinds this election.
Rubio will reconsider Senate run
If I were a betting man, and I am from time to time, I'd bet that Sen. Rubio will run for re-election .
According to the article, "Politico reported Wednesday that Lopez-Cantera had urged Rubio to jump in the race, saying he would back out if the senator ran for reelection." I can't see Sen. Rubio saying no at this point, especially considering the fact that his friend has a) urged him to run and b) promised to drop out if Sen. Rubio runs for re-election.
After the Orlando bombing, and considering the fact that Sen. Rubio would have a prominent role in crafting policies to prevent terrorist attacks, it's difficult picturing Sen. Rubio declining this option.
Further, this is pretty much proof that Sen. Rubio isn't on Trump's short list of VP candidates. Either that or Sen. Rubio doesn't want to be on Mr. Trump's short list. Either way, if Sen. Rubio runs for re-election, that eliminates the possibility of the Democrats flipping that seat. It doesn't hurt the Democrats' chances of picking up Florida's senate seat. It eliminates that possibility.
Posted Wednesday, June 15, 2016 5:30 PM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 16-Jun-16 06:44 AM
I thought Rubio wasn't that popular in FL? He didn't win the presidential primary there.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 16-Jun-16 06:48 AM
That's Trump's co-home state, too. Rubio will win his race by 15+ points.
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 17-Jun-16 09:03 AM
Cook has Florida as a toss-up at the moment with Rubio out of the race. Given that he finally seems to have figured out that distancing himself from The Orange Idiot is the only way Republicans can succeed in November, I'd concur with your analysis. Nice piece, Gary.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 17-Jun-16 11:50 AM
Thanks Bob. One thing to keep in mind, not that it will help the Orange Idiot, is that the Florida GOP, like the Wisconsin GOP, has a fantastic GOTV operation. Never underestimate the power of a smooth-running GOTV operation.
Transportation brawls shaping up
The special session that everyone wants to have hinges on 2 things: Gov. Dayton's insistence on more spending in the general budget and funding of the SWLRT. Of the two, it's thought that funding SWLRT is the higher priority for Gov. Dayton and the DFL.
That makes sense since they're the metro party. They aren't the party that puts a high priority on roads and bridges. They're the party that sees transportation through the lens of using transportation as a tool for social engineering.
If there is a special session, there's no doubt that the Tax Bill will be fixed, passed and signed. If Gov. Dayton vetoes it again, that veto will be put up for an override vote, which would pass overwhelmingly. The DFL doesn't dare sustain Gov. Dayton's veto this close to the election. That would be political suicide.
But I digress. Back to the transportation section of the bonding bill. Republicans should be the 'party of no' on SWLRT funding. In return, they could throw in a few more dollars for traditional transit. They should, however, be steadfast in their opposition to funding SWLRT.
If Gov. Dayton and the DFL pick SWLRT as their hill to fight and die on, then Republicans should take them up on that offer. That fight would strengthen every exurban and rural GOP incumbent and challenger immensely. It would simultaneously weaken every DFL legislator and challenger, too. This is one of the few times when politics is a zero-sum proposition.
Beyond the special session, though, Republicans should make a concerted effort to explain why the gas tax is obsolete as a funding method for fixing Minnesota's roads and bridges. Though this op-ed talks about Wisconsin's transportation situation, the same principles apply:
Wisconsinites are going farther on the same gallon of gas than they were even 10 years ago. This trend will not be reversing. The number of vehicles on the road has been stable since the beginning of the decade. The state cannot count on more vehicles on the road to make up for fewer gallons needed per vehicle. Furthermore, add in new vehicles that do not use gas or use very little like hybrids, fuel cells, and all electric, the future of gas tax revenue becomes clear to anyone with a basic understanding of mathematics.
The gas tax has reached the point of diminishing return. Increases in the gas tax will not provide the all the desired additional revenues the legislators, transportation bureaucrats, and road builders hope for. When you raise the price of something, you get less of it. When gasoline was $4.00 per gallon, people drove less than they do now at $2.50. Drivers also gravitated to more fuel efficient options or options that do not use gasoline at all. These options will only get more abundant as the technology improves.
In 2008, the DFL promised that raising the gas tax would provide the funds to fix Minnesota's roads and bridges. It's failed miserably. I predicted at the time it would fail. I wasn't alone.
It's time to start pushing the issue of finding different ways to fund road and bridge repair. If the GOP wants to provide a contrast to the DFL on transportation, which it should, this is the approach to take.
Posted Thursday, June 16, 2016 3:02 AM
No comments.
DFL losing the outstate PR battle
Saying that this editorial doesn't have a pro-DFL tone to it is understatement. Let's start with where the editorialist says "when Gov. Mark Dayton pocket vetoed HF 848 which would've provided significant tax relief to the citizens of Minnesota, it sort of felt like something major was lost."
I don't think Gov. Dayton realizes that his veto of the Tax Bill is killing the DFL. When the editorialist writes "Gone was tax relief for veterans, gone was tax relief for small business owners, gone was a tax break for farmers, gone was a tax break for the residents of Houston County who live in Minnesota but work in Wisconsin, gone was the forgiveness of interest paid on debt on the new school building." he listed all of the groups of people who were hurt by Gov. Dayton's veto. That's a devastating paragraph.
It's even more damaging to the DFL when the editorialist adds "All because the governor wanted additional monies for a light rail line in Minneapolis. Two years of hard, hard work by Rep. Greg Davids (Rep. Preston) on the bill dissolved by the governor not signing the measure into law." This places the blame for Minnesotans not getting tax relief squarely on Gov. Dayton's shoulders. People won't care about the drafting error. Their response is likely to be 'Call a special session and fix it then.'
Contrary to popular opinion, Republicans aren't the ones at risk. The DFL is. While Gov. Dayton and the DFL whines about the end-of-session process, Republicans talk about the tax cuts that Gov. Dayton vetoed. In a messaging fight of end-of-session process vs. DFL vetoed tax relief, tax relief wins by a wide margin. If the DFL thinks that's a fair fight, I'll agree. It's as fair a fight as I'd like.
Davids, when receiving the phone call from the governor of his plan to veto it, worked to appeal to their friendship. The governor chose politics.
That's as surprising as finding out that the sun rises in the east. There's more:
The Republicans came up from $600 million to $950 million in the bonding bill that would've addressed transportation needs in the state. Davids said anything over $1 billion jeopardizes the state's bond rating. The governor wants $1.5 billion with about $600 million going towards a new light rail line in the metro.
Gov. Dayton is foolish if he thinks Republicans will cave on SWLRT funding. Like I said earlier, Republicans are in the stronger position. The DFL is sitting in a position of weakness, especially in outstate Minnesota.
People living in outstate Minnesota won't care if SWLRT is funded. They'll care that Gov. Dayton vetoed their tax relief. The longer this drags out, the better it is for Republicans. That's because they're fighting for fixing roads and bridges and significant tax relief.
That's a winner for the GOP and then some.
Posted Thursday, June 16, 2016 6:40 AM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 17-Jun-16 08:51 AM
Any chance the Governor and DFL will cave and allow just the tax bill to pass a special session? Or a tax bill PLUS a bonding bill with no SWLRT, just as they could have had before Dayton overturned the card table because he had, and still has, a losing hand?
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 17-Jun-16 11:49 AM
If there's a special session, they'll definitely fix the Tax Bill. It's a bit dicier with the bonding bill. Gov. Dayton is just foolish enough to not call a special session, thinking that the DFL has the upper hand, which they don't.
Constitution 1, environmentalists 0
It gives me great joy to write this post to tell loyal readers of LFR that a 3-judge panel has ruled that Minnesota overstepped its authority when it passed the Next Generation Energy Act, aka NGEA.
The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that "the Next Generation Energy Act violates the U.S. Constitution's provision allowing only Congress to regulate commerce among states." According to the article, the three-judge panel "unanimously decided Minnesota does not have the authority to order North Dakota plants to make changes," saying "a statute that has the practical effect of exerting extraterritorial control over 'commerce that takes place wholly outside of the state's borders' is likely to be invalid."
Put in simpler terms, this ruling isn't likely to be overturned. If it were, it would, hypothetically speaking, give North Dakota the authority to pass a law that required that all electricity generated in Minnesota and sold to the regional power grid to be nuclear power. Still, Gov. Dayton isn't backing down:
"I will continue to defend the state of Minnesota's right to protect the quality of the air our citizens breathe," Dayton said. "The state statute does not prevent anyone from building and operating a new power-generating facility, whose emissions will affect Minnesota's air quality. It only requires that those new emissions must be offset by the same or greater reduction in emissions from other plants. In other words, Minnesota's law encourages the replacement of older, more-polluting power plants with more efficient, cleaner facilities."
Those are brave-sounding words but they aren't rooted in intelligence. They're rooted in the left's ideology. No state has the right to order another state what it must do on anything. That 'right' doesn't exist.
Stenehjem said that Minnesota's options are limited: ask the entire appeals court to take up the issue, appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court or accept Wednesday's ruling and pay North Dakota $1 million. The attorney general said the first two options are rarely accepted by the court system and he prefers the third. "I think it is more of a roadblock than a speed bump," Stenehjem said of the ruling.
This ruling pretty much settles this issue. Gov. Dayton has the right to appeal the ruling but that's just a waste of taxpayers' money on a case he'll lose.
Posted Thursday, June 16, 2016 12:06 PM
Comment 1 by Bob J. at 17-Jun-16 08:59 AM
"Those are brave-sounding words but they aren't rooted in intelligence. "
___
That's the story of Marx Dayton's life.
Legislative pretender update
This is the time of year when hope springs eternal for legislative hopefuls. Think of it like the spring training for state politics. One pretender that's feeling particularly enthusiastic is Ann Buckvold. She's the DFL-endorsed candidate for House District 13B. This morning, Ms. Buckvold sent me a flurry or tweets explaining why she should be taken seriously.
In those tweets, she said "I'm running for the people of district 13A. I love hearing a Republican say, "You are a Democrat I would love to support." Upon committing $$ to my campaign. I have Republicans and fiscal conservatives in my district who also have told me I have their vote. One guy in 14A told me he wished he and his wife could move to my district just to vote for me. Then that same guy sent me a check for more than originally committed. I also have Republicans in 13B who are supporting me. Yes, that's plural. They've lived in the area a long time."
Being the heartless, mean-spirited conservative that I am, I asked Ms. Buckvold if she'd written her concession speech yet. Seriously, I wasn't being mean-spirited. I just saw what the 2014 election looked like. It wasn't pretty:
In 2014, the DFL candidate won 3 of the 25 precincts in the district. Jeff Howe, the GOP incumbent, won with 60.6% of the vote. If you eliminate Rockville, the reddest precinct in HD-13B, from the vote totals, Rep. Howe would still have won with 59.5% of the vote. FYI- How won Rockville with 722 votes compared with 255 votes for the DFL's sacrificial lamb, meaning that Rep. Howe won that district with 74% of the vote.
You know it's a safe district when you can eliminate the reddest precinct and still win with 59.5% of the vote.
My analysis isn't mean-spirited. It's just based on verified facts.
Posted Thursday, June 16, 2016 3:08 PM
Comment 1 by JerryE9 at 17-Jun-16 08:45 AM
Interesting that DFLers sound a lot like Republicans when they run for office, and then vote with the rest of the DFL once elected? As we say of our DFL Senator here in a red district, "Heck of a nice guy, but he's in the DFL. Nothing wrong with them individually, it's when they get in packs..."
