June 24-29, 2015
Jun 24 04:17 Progressive logic Jun 24 10:58 MPCA Citizen Board's final meeting Jun 25 23:20 The new and improved Timberwolves Jun 27 11:11 Andrew Napolitano, college president? Jun 27 11:55 Laurence Tribe's ill-informed opinion Jun 29 00:36 Ranking Minnesota's economy
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Progressive logic
If there is a thing called progressive logic, this Times Writers Group article fits the definition perfectly:
Rep. Phyllis Kahn, DFL-Minneapolis, introduced an amendment titled "Northstar Commuter Rail Extension Study," key to getting the line from Big Lake to St. Cloud. The study would estimate ridership, identify funding sources and include a timeline for implementation.
Ironically, it was Central Minnesota lawmakers who put the kibosh on this perfectly reasonable, much-needed effort. Rep. Jim Newberger, R-Becker, took the lead, characterizing Northstar commuter rail as only a shuttle to the St. Cloud prison. "Boy, wouldn't that be convenient," he said on the House floor, "to have that rail line going from the prison to North Minneapolis." He continued that in his "neck of the woods" in Becker, "we don't call it Northstar, we call it the black hole because that's where all the money goes."
Where to begin?
By Newberger's logic, apparently no one from the Twin Cities would want to visit St. Cloud for any reason other than to stop at the prison - not to go to St. Cloud State University, Munsinger and Clemens Gardens, the Paramount Arts District or to see the 100,000-plus people living in our metro area. By his logic, we should take out U.S. Highway 10, so people could not visit the 242 prisoners from Hennepin County behind the granite walls. Egad!
We don't need to spend money on more studies. Ridership of the Northstar is tiny. As for where to begin, let's start with the reality that only transportation lobbyists and pork-tasting politicians like the Northstar project. Thoughtful people prefer the liberty that comes with driving. Environmentalists have been trying to force transit down our throats for decades. People have overwhelmingly rejected these options.
Rather than listening to the people, these progressives keep pushing these unwanted options. When will they accept that we aren't interested?
Posted Wednesday, June 24, 2015 4:17 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 24-Jun-15 09:20 AM
Sometimes good questions is the best way to get people to actually think, so good job. Here's more. If this is really such a good idea, why hasn't private enterprise lined up in droves wanting to build and operate this thing? Or at least lined up a great bus service, in the meantime? How long will it take for the fares to repay the cost of the line, PLUS maintenance and operations costs?
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 26-Jun-15 12:26 PM
Gary:
If you read the quote it look like he was trying to describe (in a bad a way) that the Northstar line if built will be a waste of money because of the lack of ridership.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
MPCA Citizen Board's final meeting
The MPCA's
"Dissolving the Citizens' Board is bad for rural and metro Minnesota," said Kathy DeBuhr at a protest before the board's final meeting Tuesday morning. "This legislature has taken away the voice of the common person. The little guy."
DeBuhr was among those who protested a proposed 9,000-cow "mega-dairy feedlot" in western Minnesota in 2014. In a controversial move, the Citizens' Board ordered the dairy operation to seek an expensive and time-consuming environmental impact statement even though MPCA staff had not ordered one. The dairy ultimately decided not to go forward with the project.
Ms. DeBuhr's whining is annoying at best. This wasn't a panel of ordinary citizens. It was an activist board. The fact that they ran off a major dairy operation after the operation had gotten its permits from the MPCA speaks to their activism.
Further, what type of citizens panel reserves a spot for a union member ? The Board had a member of Duluth's Transit Authority and an "agriculture representative", too. I still haven't heard anyone explain why there's a need for a citizens panel. Isn't the MPCA doing its job properly? If it isn't, shouldn't the MPCA be overhauled or outright abolished?
The Citizens' Board was established to guard against undue political influence of the agency and to create a public and transparent decision making process on controversial issues. Supporters of the board say its abolishment will remove the final public process for environmental review and permitting actions for industry and factory farms.
The notion that the Citizens Board was impartial is absurd. It wasn't. It was filled with activists. As for the statement that this removes "the final public process for environmental review and permitting," that's a bit melodramatic. Why is it necessary for limitless environmental reviews?
Posted Wednesday, June 24, 2015 10:58 AM
No comments.
The new and improved Timberwolves
The Minnesota Timberwolves were excited going into Thursday night's NBA Draft because they had the first overall pick in the draft for the first time in the team's 26-year history. They also had the first pick of the 2nd round, the 31st pick overall along with the 36th pick overall.
When the dust settled at the end of the first round, the Timberwolves had picked Kentucky's Karl Anthony-Towns with the first overall pick, then traded their second round picks to the Cleveland Cavaliers for Tyus Jones, the NCAA Final Four MVP for Duke. For Jones, it's a dream come true after being named the best basketball player in Minnesota his final 3 seasons at Apple Valley High School.
Here's the video of KAT getting picked first overall, then getting interviewed on ESPN, then watching his parents react to the news:
The more you learn about KAT, the more you're certain that he isn't just a talented player. Without question, he's a supremely talented player both offensively and defensively. Flip Saunders has to be pinching himself because, more than anything else, KAT's got the mindset and work ethic of a champion. Teaming him up with Andrew Wiggins, this year's NBA Rookie of the Year and NBA All Star Weekend Dunk Champion Zach LaVine is exciting enough.
Adding Tyus Jones, with his winning pedigree at every level that he's played at, is how foundations for future championships are built. After trading for Tyus, T'Wolves Coach Flip Saunders walked over to the night club where Jones' family was watching the draft:
For years, I found it impossible to get excited about the Timberwolves. They're still a few years away from being a championship contender but, without question, the building blocks are there.
Posted Thursday, June 25, 2015 11:20 PM
No comments.
Andrew Napolitano, college president?
When I've written about censorship on college campuses , it's usually been because people have argued that they have the right to never be offended. Jon Stewart recently interviewed Judge Napolitano about the First Amendment, specifically citing the right to fly the Confederate Flag. Here's the entire interview:
Here's the heart of what Judge Napolitano told Stewart :
NAPOLITANO: I say you have the right to fly that flag on your private property. You have the right to any opinion or thought you want, even one manifested or animated by hate. And the government has no business regulating thought. If the First Amendment protects anything, it protects your absolute unfettered right to think what you want and say what you think.
Last week, I heard something simple, yet profound. Someone said that there's no need to protect popular speech because nobody objects to it. The First Amendment is the most important part of the Bill of Rights because it tells the government that We The People will decide what's said and that the government shall not have the right to tell us to shut up or restrict what we say.
Judge Napolitano quickly pointed out, however, that if he said something controversial, or even hateful, he doesn't have the right to not hear from people who disagree with him. Napolitano said that nobody in the United States has "the right to not be offended."
Apparently, the enlightened people on college campuses didn't get that memo. Apparently, Cass Sunstein didn't learn that in civics class either:
In recent months, universities have turned their attention to an important problem that should be included in our national effort to examine and root out bigotry. They have identified, and attempted to reduce, "microaggressions" -- words or behavior that might stigmatize or humiliate women or members of minority groups, with particular emphasis on African-Americans, disabled people, and gays and lesbians. The effort has admirable goals, but there is a risk that schools will overshoot the mark.
University administrators don't have the authority to ban words from campus. Further, administrators aren't doing students a favor by limiting students' exposure to repulsive language. Just like there's no way to totally eliminate gun violence, there's no way to stop people from saying disgusting things.
That's because there will always be hate-filled, ill-tempered people.
The solution to this isn't banning words or flags that trigger hurt feelings. The solution is criticizing people who say hurtful things. BTW, Hillary Clinton has called for banning certain types of flags.
I'd way rather live in a world that lives according to Judge Napolitano's principles than a world living by Hillary's principles. It isn't even close.
Posted Saturday, June 27, 2015 11:11 AM
No comments.
Laurence Tribe's ill-informed opinion
Laurence Tribe's op-ed about the King v. Burwell ruling is typical progressivism. It's all about rationalizing a terrible, wrong-headed decision. Tribe made some statements that deserve rebutting. This is one of those statements:
The Supreme Court correctly applied standard interpretive methods in holding that, despite the apparent clarity of those four words, the law makes subsidies available on all exchanges, state and federal. Looking to the overall purpose, structure, and context of the Act, the court asked with incredulity why Congress would risk total implosion of the ACA just to encourage states to create their own exchanges especially when Congress itself provided the federal backstop.
When the words are clear, which they are, the test that Tribe mentioned isn't applied. Typically, that test is only applied if the words are ambiguous. Chief Justice Roberts said that the 4 words were "inartful drafting." Justice Scalia's response was that it wasn't likely that that inartful drafting would appear in the ACA's language 7 different times.
As for whether Congress "would risk total implosion of the ACA just to encourage states to create their own exchanges", the answer is yes. That's why the federal government didn't start building their website right away. Their plan -- their concerted plan -- was to pressure states into creating their own exchanges. Further, the IRS didn't write its rule extending subsidies to people who bought their insurance through HealthCare.gov until it was clear that a substantial number of states weren't going to create state-run exchanges.
Isn't it curious that that clarification wasn't the first thing mentioned in the rules? The instructions to the IRS weren't written until late in the process. Why wasn't it the first rule written? If the ACA's success hinged on the subsidies, shouldn't that have been the first rule written?
The people also won because the Roberts Court has given them a solid basis for trusting that hard-won victories in Congress will remain intact when challenged in the court. When it decides constitutional cases, like the much-anticipated same-sex marriage cases, the court's role is to serve as a check on the people, ensuring that legislative or popular majorities don't act in violation of the Constitution. This is the sense in which the court has famously been described as 'counter-majoritarian.'
The Constitution was built to restrict what government isn't authorized to do. That's insanity. The Fourth Amendment wasn't written to tell people what they couldn't do. It was written to tell government what it can't do. Specifically, the Fourth Amendment prohibits the government from conducting unreasonable searches against private citizens and publicly-traded companies.
The First Amendment prohibits Congress from writing laws that restrict people's ability to speak out against politicians and government. It isn't a check on people. It's another check on government.
If Prof. Tribe can't understand the most basic principles underpinning the Constitution, then his opinions on Supreme Court rulings is questionable.
Posted Saturday, June 27, 2015 11:55 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 28-Jun-15 08:03 AM
Gary:
You went on a big rant, but missed a big point. Lets not forget that Obamacare was passed when in 2009 a President had been swept in with a Congress just because the people weren't happy with the current President and the current ruling party. Tribe's argument is that the people can't be allowed to think especially after they see the effect of bad laws have been passed that need to be repealed or at least dramatically changed. In other words he's arguing once something is passed no matter how bad it should remain law. That is certainly what the constitution wasn't meant for. Somebody should ask Tribe why did we need I believe the 21st amendment if the 18th amendment was so good for the country.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 29-Jun-15 12:06 AM
Walter, I didn't mention that because it's irrelevant in terms of determining a law's constitutionality. In King v. Burwell, it was that Chief Justice Roberts said that the clearly written phrase of "Exchange established by the States" was ambiguous. The test that Roberts applied is only supposed to apply when the text wasn't clear. The text was clear. Roberts just didn't like the outcome. If he wanted to have input on a bill's language, he should've been a legislator or a legislative assistant.
The Founding Fathers established 2 political branches and a single judicial branch. For all intents and purposes, we have 3 political branches and an unaccountable branch (bureaucrats with rulemaking abilities).
Comment 2 by eric z. at 28-Jun-15 01:31 PM
Have you seen Larry Klayman's opinion reported on the WND site? It kind of squares with your analysis.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 29-Jun-15 12:20 AM
Eric, While I disagree with some of Klayman's conspiracy theories, I certainly agree with him that the "concept of life tenure was intended to insulate the justices from the influences of politics." Instead, these justices are wannabe politicians. They've become a third political branch when we need them to be the branch that tells the executive and legislative branches when they've exceeded their constitutional authorities.
In the case of the ACA, the executive and legislative branches dramatically exceeded the authority the Constitution gave them.
Ranking Minnesota's economy
Gov. Dayton is proudly proclaiming that Minnesota is the best state to do business in. He's basing that propaganda on CNBC's latest ranking . After looking at how they arrived at the categories that they ranked states on, it's easy to see how CNBC arrived at their ridiculous ratings. First, it's important to know this about the rating system :
For example, if more states tout their low business costs, the "Cost of Doing Business" category carries greater weight. That way, our study ranks the states based on the criteria they use to sell themselves.
According to CNBC's report, workforce is the most important category, followed by cost of doing business and infrastructure, economy, quality of life, technology & innovation, education, business friendliness, cost of living and, finally, access to capital.
Minnesota ranked 13th in workforce, 35th in cost of doing business, 9th in infrastructure, 5th in economy, 3rd in quality of life, 6th in technology and innovation, 2nd in education, 23rd in business friendliness, 32nd in cost of living and 23rd in access to capital.
CNBC's ratings only tell us what the states think of themselves. They don't tell us what businesses think of the state. The fact that more businesses are leaving Minnesota than are moving to Minnesota is the best indicator of what businesses think.
That isn't to say that Minnesota is getting everything wrong. There are some things that we can build off of. It's just that there's a handful of important things that we'd better correct if we want to be the best. Lowering the cost of doing business is essential. That's only possible by streamlining government, especially regulations. Cutting special deals with a couple companies to entice them here, then shafting businesses that are already here, which the Dayton administration has done, needs to change, too.
UPDATE: King Banaian's article for the Center for the American Experiment highlights similar points. This point is especially noteworthy:
If you're a state that isn't particularly business friendly, you don't talk about that in your marketing materials. You emphasize other things. You puff your materials with discussion of quality of life and how hardworking your workers are and ignore the areas where your policies might make business a little harder to conduct. And CNBC will go right along and take weight off those things, if the rest of the states are doing the same thing.
I can't emphasize enough the fact that CNBC's article isn't a serious economic statement. It's a statement based off of the states' PR statements.
Originally posted Monday, June 29, 2015, revised 30-Jun 5:55 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 29-Jun-15 07:52 AM
Gary:
How can we be second in education when the school districts of Minneapolis and Saint Paul are tremendous failures. If the people who did this study don't know that then you have to question the quality of the whole study. Did they make Texas 50th by the way?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Rex Newman at 29-Jun-15 05:42 PM
Unfortunately, it's a level playing field. Every state has its rotting core city school system or systems. Apparently, on average we just suck less.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 29-Jun-15 11:40 PM
Actually, Rex, it's pretty clear that Minnesota's business costs and cost of living aren't that great.
