May 5, 2011
May 05 00:13 Are Constitutional Amendments 2012's Aminating Factor? May 05 08:38 The End of the 'UBL Honeymoon'? May 05 10:08 Andy Nails It May 05 13:45 Candidates, Start Your Campaigning!!! May 05 19:58 Is Amy a Little Corn-Fused?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Are Constitutional Amendments 2012's Aminating Factor?
This ECM article features the pontifications of liberal pontificators Larry Jacobs and David Schultz on the subject of constitutional amendments on the 2012 Minnesota ballot. Here's a glimpse at their pontifications:
University of Minnesota Humphrey Institute Political Science Professor Larry Jacobs sees the state heading into 'new territory' in recent days with constitutional amendments.
Jacobs foresees vigorous campaigning next election as pro and con constitutional amendment groups battle it out across the state.
'Both sides (Democrats and Republicans) will use the constitutional amendments to drive turnout,' said Jacobs.
The number of constitutional amendments appearing on the ballot could cause some voters to simply ignore some of them, he indicated.
'This hasn't happened in the past but the number of amendments this year may change the dynamics,' Jacobs wrote in an e-mail.
There could be a political cost to Republicans.
'They started the session promising to take care of No. 1 priorities (jobs and budget) and may be vulnerable to attacks from the governor for taking on divisive, non-essential issues in ways that make the Republicans seem 'out of touch,' wrote Jacobs.
David Schultz, a political commentator and professor at Hamline University School of Business, said recent elections in California where voters have faced multiple proposed constitutional amendments has show voters have 'a finite interest' in wading through amendments.
To that extent, campaigns may draw voter attention to some amendments while others, with less active support, may be overlooked.
While lawmakers may have 'mixed motives' in proposing constitutional amendments, some clearly are not meant to drive voter turnout, Schultz noted.
What's likely to happen is that people will most be animated about Mary Kiffmeyer's Photo ID constitutional amendment. The other constitutional amendment that should get serious consideration is the one that requires a three-fifths vote in both houses of the legislature to raise taxes.
The DFL will campaign furiously against both initiatives. They'll campaign furiously against Photo ID because Photo ID would eliminate vouching, which the DFL insists is important in getting as many people voting as possible. Republicans will agree that it gets lots of people voting. They'll just argue that, without Photo ID, we won't know if the people getting ballots are cleared to vote. For that matter, without Photo ID, it isn't possible to know if the person getting the ballot is who they say they are.
The other constitutional amendment that will likely attract attention is the one requiring 60 percent of state senators and 60 percent of state representatives approve of any tax increases. The only way that constitutional amendment doesn't pass is if it's combined with Sen. Robling's amendment requiring that the state not spend more than 98 percent of that biennium's projected revenues.
I'm not opposed to being frugal. I just don't know if the tax increase constitutional amendment passes if it's attached to the spending limit constitutional amendment. I'd rather keeping those amendments seperate because it's important that the tax increase constitutional amendment pass in 2012.
Since more people hate tax increases than hate spending increases, why endanger the tax increase constitutional amendment? At minimum, splitting the spending and tax increase constitutional amendments into seperate bills will give conservatives the best opportunity at winning at least 1 victory.
As for Jacobs' commentary that Republicans might "be vulnerable to attacks from the governor for taking on divisive, non-essential issues", that's utter nonsense.
Photo ID, which consistently attracts 70+ percent support, isn't divisive in the truest sense of the word. It's divisive only in the sense that the DFL is passionately opposed to it. On that issue, they're in the distinct minority. Photo ID has near-unanimous support amongst Republicans and strong support amongst independents.
I won't disagree that this is a wedge issue because it puts the DFL on the wrong side of another popular issue. That doesn't make it divisive. That just proves that the DFL isn't willing to listen to We The People on that important issue.
That, Professor Jacobs, is why Photo ID might show voters how out of touch the DFL is with voters.
Posted Thursday, May 5, 2011 12:13 AM
Comment 1 by Stonewall Jackson at 05-May-11 09:41 AM
The DFL keeps repeating the mantra that having these constitutional amendments on the 2012 ballot "will hurt the Republicans."
If the DFL really believed that, wouldn't they be racing to help the GOP put the amendments on the ballot in the first place?
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 05-May-11 10:40 AM
Yes, they would. GR8 observation.
Comment 2 by eric z at 05-May-11 06:49 PM
How about an amendment against government competition against private sector land speculations?
When the government gets into land speculation, it is only on the foreclosed-failure end of things, so that kind of indecency should be stopped.
Even if it takes a Constitutional change to reign in such coarse excesses, it is worth the thought.
How about it?
Any thoughts, caveats, etc.?
The End of the 'UBL Honeymoon'?
The first question that I had after reading a little ways into this article was this: Does this report end President Obama's 'UBL Honeymoon' in the polls? I'm betting it's the start of the polling returning to where they were prior to the SEALs killing UBL.
The number of claims for U.S. unemployment benefits unexpectedly rose last week, pushed up by auto-plant shutdowns and other unusual events that seasonal variations failed to take into account, the Labor Department said.
Applications for jobless benefits jumped by 43,000 to 474,000 in the week ended April 30, the most since August , Labor Department figures showed today.
This isn't the type of news the Labor Department was hoping for the day before this month's jobs report. After two better-than-average months in terms of job creation, it's looking like this month's jobs report will pour some cold water on the job creation 'campfire'.
If I'm reading this right, March started with first-time jobless claims of 375,000. Two months later, first-time jobless claims have risen by 100,000. That isn't the way to build consumer confidence.
While President Obama got a bounce from the great news that UBL had been killed, it's likely that the economy, whether it's high gas prices, high inflation, high unemployment or dropping GDP growth, will likely affect President Obama's re-election chances more than Sunday night's UBL news.
This isn't good news for the economy either:
The cost of living in the U.S. rose at its fastest pace since December 2009 in the 12 months ended in March, the same month in which Chinese consumer prices rose by the most since 2008.
For all of President Obama's happy talk about the economy heading in the right direction, he's suffering through an 'economic good news deficit'. President Obama's enablers' insistence that the economy will be a point of strength in next year's campaign aren't dealing with reality.
Posted Thursday, May 5, 2011 8:59 AM
No comments.
Andy Nails It
Andy Aplikowski nails it with this post . First, Andy cites this Strib article :
Gov. Mark Dayton made it plain Wednesday that he'll take lawmakers to a special session before he agrees to an all-cuts budget.
GOP legislative leaders, the Senate in particular, has insisted that the budget must not go beyond $34 billion.
On Wednesday, less than 20 days from adjournment, Dayton said that won't happen.
'We won't leave the session with a budget that's $34 billion,' he said. 'We'll leave the session with it unresolved.'
Gov. Dayton's insistance that the GOP legislature, which got more votes than he did, accept his my-way-or-the-highway ultimatum is unacceptable. Here's how Andy nails it:
Look, it isn't that Republicans are ignoring DFL Legislator's proposals. They aren't introducing plans. No redistricting. No budget. Just criticism.
Governor Dayton is the sole person who can avoid a shutdown. Governor Dayton hasn't even submitted a working budget.
I wrote in this post how Rep. Pat Garofalo called the DFL out during Tuesday night's House Redistricting Committee hearing:
Another contentious moment came after Rep. Melissa Hortman repeatedly asked Rep. Anderson the same question. Rep. Hortman's questions were met with the same replies: that the lines were drawn according to the principles passed last week.
After hearing the same question repeated seemingly forever, Rep. Pat Garofalo posed a simple question to Rep. Hortman. He asked if the DFL would present their own map, saying that 'I know you guys won't present your own budget, which is something entirely different, but I was wondering if you planned on presenting your own map.'
The only difference between DFL legislators last year and this year is that they aren't an obstructionist majority this year. They're still just as devoid of reform ideas as they've ever been.
Andy is right. Gov. Dayton's budget is so unpopular that Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen, the DFL leaders in the legislature, won't even sponsor it. It must really be bad if he can't even get Kool-Aid drinkers like Rep. Winkler, Sen. Marty, Rep. Phyllis Kahn or Sen. Pappas to sponsor it.
I've written consistently that the DFL hasn't offered constructive amendments this session, at least not on a consistent basis. What they've done instead is do the same thing on every bill that the GOP legislature brings to the House or Senate floor: they argue that the GOP isn't spending enough.
They haven't put a comprehensive budget plan together yet this session. BTW, this exposes last summer's DFL/ABM/Union meme that Gov. Dayton was the only candidate with a comprehensive, detailed budget of all the candidates.
We knew his budget was a joke the minute the Minnesota Department of Revenue said his tax-the-rich scheme wouldn't work :
But based on Dayton's plan and figures provided by the Minnesota Department of Revenue, some (admittedly imperfect) projections about how the state's tax code would change under his administration can be made.
The bulk of Dayton's budget remedy, $4 billion, relies on raising taxes on the state's wealthiest citizens. The DFL nominee defines this as individuals making more than $130,000 annually and couples earning more than $150,000.
Currently, there are three income tax brackets in Minnesota, with the top earners paying 7.85 percent. Dayton's plan calls for adding 'at least two, probably three' additional levels for wealthy residents.
Marginal rate math is dicey
So how much money would boosting income tax rates actually deliver? According to the revenue department, each tenth-of-a-percent increase would currently bring in an additional $27 million annually, or $54 million each biennium. Thus, to come up with $4 billion in the 2012-13 budget cycle, you'd need to nearly double the state's top tax bracket, pushing it to more than 15 percent, easily the highest in the nation.
How about $3 billion in additional revenue? That would require boosting the state's top tier to 13.4 percent, still the loftiest nationwide. And what about raising $2 billion? To get there under the current tax structure, the state's top rate would need to be 11.55 percent.
These figures don't mesh with Dayton's plan for a couple of reasons. For starters, the state's current top income tax tier ($75,000 for individuals; $132,000 for couples) is slightly lower than the category of earners that the DFL nominee wants to target for tax hikes. In addition, Dayton has stated during debates that he won't raise rates higher than 11 percent, the level currently levied by Hawaii on individuals who make more than $200,000, currently the highest state bracket in the country. (By contrast, six states states, Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas and Washington, collect no income tax.) Simply raising the state's current top tax level to 11 percent would bring in $1.7 billion.
Gov. Dayton is a travesty wrapped in a joke. His budget is a laughingstock. The only reason he's taken seriously is because of his official title. It isn't because he's a great policy thinker. It isn't because he's had a lengthy history of being a great senator. He was so terrible and erratic that he chose not to run for a second term because Mark Kennedy would've mopped the floor with him.
Let's repeat this again: Andy is right. Gov. Dayton and the DFL have sat on the sidelines and complained. They haven't offered any constructive ideas on Minnesota's biggest budget challenges. Instead, they've only insisted that Republicans aren't spending enough.
That isn't what leaders do. That's what spineless politicians do to hide the huge flaws in their budget. Let's be clear about this. It isn't that Gov. Dayton and the DFL don't have a plan. It's that they haven't published their plan because it would get ridiculed into oblivion by everyone who isn't a hardline DFL activist.
I double dog dare Gov. Dayton and the DFL to argue that Republicans aren't spending enough and that they aren't taxing Minnesota's job creators enough.
Good luck with that one.
Posted Thursday, May 5, 2011 10:08 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 05-May-11 06:40 PM
Andy nails some interesting GOP scalps to the tent pole, on the Block E casino proposal.
But why not have one? Tribal rights to fleece those with an addiction are not written in stone. They should be fleecable by the government too.
Dayton is correct, however, at least half the take, more ideally, should go to the general fund.
Think about it. The Service Workers could get the employment positions, GOP types getting the lobbying money and sponsorship perks - and owning it after buying it.
Equal opportunity. Bipartisan.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 06-May-11 12:25 AM
Screw that!!! The last thing we need is another revenue source to put government on autopilot.
Living within our means means setting priorities that help Minnesota's families, not the unions.
Candidates, Start Your Campaigning!!!
Jim Galloway's post is sure to excite a big portion of the GOP base:
Just got off the phone with Rick Tyler, spokesman for Newt Gingrich.
I'd called to see why the former U.S. House speaker was passing on the first GOP debate of presidential candidates on Thursday, in Greenville, S.C., and broadcast on Fox News.
Entry requirements required a declaration of candidacy that Gingrich was not prepared to make, Tyler said. 'We decided to stick to our time line.'
And what is that time line? Tyler wouldn't say much, but Gingrich is scheduled to speak to Georgia Republicans at their state meeting on Friday, May 13. 'By the time Newt speaks to the Georgia convention, he'll be a candidate,' Tyler said.
That news alone would make this a big news day that essentially says that the 2012 presidential campaign has all-but-officially started. This news is even better news for Republicans:
Representative Mike Pence announced on Thursday he's in the running for the Republican nomination for Indiana governor in 2012.
The six-term congressman made it official this morning in a long-expected announcement to supporters via conference call, e-mail, Facebook and video.
The conservative Republican also filed papers with the Indiana Secretary of State forming the "Mike Pence for Indiana" committee.
Pence said a formal campaign kickoff will follow but said he wanted supporters to know "I'm in this race." Making reference to the Indianapolis 500, he told supporters "any real Hoosier knows that every big race begins in May anyway."
Barring something unforeseen, the day before Rep. Pence's announcement was the best shot Democrats had of winning this election. Pence is immensely popular and charismatic. If Pence works hard, which I'm certain is a given, the only question left is what Pence's margin of victory will be.
"Our state is on the edge of an era of growth and opportunity like no other in our lifetime," he told supporters.
Under Daniels' leadership, "Indiana has set the pace in fiscal responsibility, job creation and reform," Pence said. "But our work is not over."
Gov. Daniels has a lengthy, impressive record of reform. It's an agenda I anticipate Rep. Pence will continue.
After we elect a Republican president in 2012 and the economy finally gets straightened out, governors like Pence, Chris Christie and John Kasich will have a great time innovating and improving people's lives.
What's significant about today's announcements is that Newt and Rep. Pence will connect with independents. Democrats should be afraid of that.
Posted Thursday, May 5, 2011 1:45 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 05-May-11 06:42 PM
My camplaign slogan:
Obama got Osama. Pawlenty was hard pressed to gut shoot a deer.
Starting early, indeed.
Comment 2 by J. Ewing at 06-May-11 10:34 AM
The great thing about Pence running for Governor is that it frees Mitch Daniels, my early favorite, to run for Pres. He's got to do more to explain that "set aside the social issues for a while" thing, though.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 06-May-11 10:55 AM
Mitch Daniels isn't on my radar screen anymore. He's said that progressive hero Woodrow Wilson is one of his heros. NO THANKS!!!
Is Amy a Little Corn-Fused?
If I didn't know better, I'd think that Sen. Amy Klobuchar is a bit corn-fused. Less than two months ago, on March 13, Sen. Klobuchar announced that she was co-sponsoring the SAFEST Act with Tim Johnson , (D-SD). I suspect that Sen. Klobuchar is confused because of this MPR article . First, let's look at the highlights of the SAFEST Act:
Democratic Sens. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Tim Johnson of South Dakota introduced an energy bill Thursday that focuses on developing domestic renewable energy. The move comes after months of Republican attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and government-funded clean energy projects.
Called the Securing America's Future with Energy and Sustainable Technologies (SAFEST) Act, the bill would establish long-term incentives for the development of biofuels infrastructure, extend ethanol tax credits, and impose a renewable electricity standard of 25 percent by 2025.
Last year, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee approved a plan with a renewable electricity standard of only 15 percent by 2025.
'The strength of our nation is tied to the strength of our energy economy,' Klobuchar said in a statement announcing the bill. 'At a time of rising gas prices, this bill will provide incentives that can help us utilize more homegrown biofuels, strengthen our homegrown energy economy in Minnesota, and secure our energy future.'
'This legislation invests in jobs on farms and in manufacturing in America,' Johnson added. 'This will prevent us going from importing oil to importing wind turbines and electric cars.'
Now let's look at the legislation that Sen. Klobuchar signed onto this week:
Minnesota's two U.S. senators, along with lawmakers from other corn-growing states, have introduced a bill that would gradually end tax subsidies for ethanol producers.
Under the proposal, the tax credit for the corn-based fuel would drop from 45 cents a gallon today to 15 cents a gallon by 2013. After that, the size of the credit would be linked to the price of oil.
How can Sen. Klobuchar sign onto a bill that "invests in jobs on farms and in manufacturing in America' and that prevents the United States "from importing oil to importing wind turbines and electric cars", then co-sponsor legislation that cuts "the tax credit for the corn-based fuel...from 45 cents a gallon today to 15 cents a gallon by 2013"?
Isn't that like saying she wants ethanol to be an important part of weaning the United States off foreign oil by using ethanol, then telling ethanol producers, aka farmers, that their subsidy will be slashed by two-thirds in a little over a year?
TRANSLATION: Sen. Klobuchar wants ethanol production to increase even though she's co-sponsoring a bill that raises the cost of producing ethanol by 67%.
After additional consideration, that isn't corn-fusing. That's just plain counterproductive.
The good news is that House Republicans have the solution to $100/bbl oil prices:
This week, Republicans will continue working to address skyrocketing gas prices and help create jobs by advancing two American Energy Initiative bills that will boost American energy production in the Gulf and other areas. Here's a quick summary of the legislation the House is scheduled to consider this week, courtesy of the Natural Resources Committee :
H.R. 1230 , the Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act, passed the Committee with bipartisan support. It would require the Administration to move forward promptly to conduct offshore lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Virginia that have been delayed or canceled.
H.R. 1229 , the Putting the Gulf Back to Work Act, passed the Committee with bipartisan support. It would end the de facto moratorium on American energy production in the Gulf of Mexico in a safe, responsible and transparent manner by setting firm timelines for considering permits to drill.
According to Jazz Shaw's post , there's more to the American Energy Initiative that H.R.1229 and H.R.1230:
H.R. 1231 Reversing President Obama's Offshore Moratorium Act. To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to require that each 5-year offshore oil and gas leasing program offer leasing in the areas with the most prospective oil and gas resources, to establish a domestic oil and natural gas production goal, and for other purposes.
If Sen. Klobuchar really wants to drop gas prices while minimizing America's reliance on foreign oil, she should offer to co-sponsor the American Energy Initiative in the Senate. I'm confident that Republicans would welcome her gesture of bipartisanship on an issue of this vital economic importance.
According to this post on Speaker Boehner's website , Rep. Doc Hastings, Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, gave this speech:
'Mr. Chairman, the national average price of gasoline has gone up 10 cents in just the last week and is now at $3.985. By comparison, the price was $1.84 when President Obama was sworn into office.
While home in my Central Washington state district, I heard from farmers, the foundation of our region's economy, who are finding it harder and harder to pay these high energy prices. I have no doubt that my colleagues from every part of the country heard about similar economic impacts of rising gasoline prices.
The pain being felt today has been exacerbated by the actions of the Obama Administration, who for the past two years has repeatedly blocked, hindered and raised the cost to access our American energy resources.
The House Natural Resources Committee recently passed three bills (H.R. 1229, H.R. 1230 and H.R. 1231) with bipartisan support, all of which reverse specific actions taken by the Obama Administration to block offshore energy production. These bills will increase American energy production, create jobs and lower energy prices.
These are the first of an array of bills that will be introduced by our Committee as part of the American Energy Initiative that will focus on expanding renewable energy, onshore production, hydropower, coal, critical minerals, and address offshore revenue sharing and other needed reforms.
Today we are debating H.R. 1230, the Restarting American Offshore Leasing Act. This bill requires the Secretary of the Interior to conduct oil and natural gas lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico and offshore Virginia that have been delayed or cancelled by the Obama Administration.
The Virginia lease sale was scheduled to happen this year. But due to Obama Administration actions, the earliest a lease sale could occur is 2017. This bill will create thousands of jobs and, according to the CBO, generate $40 million in new revenue over the next decade.
I would note that very soon after this bill passed out of Committee with bipartisan support, the Obama Administration announced it would move forward with one Gulf lease sale. Prior to this sudden action, the Obama Administration was on course to make 2011 the first year since 1958 that the federal government would not have held an offshore lease sale.
Squeezing in one conveniently timed offshore lease sale does not undo the Obama Administration's long track record of blocking and delaying American energy production. This bill is necessary to hold their feet to the fire and ensure these lease sales move forward.
Americans across the country, Republicans, Democrats and Independents, all recognize the need to increase production of our offshore energy resources. A recent CNN poll found that 69 percent of Americans favor increased offshore drilling.
Americans understand the pain inflicted by rising gasoline prices, and yet we continue to hear the same excuses on why we shouldn't act.
•My colleagues across the aisle will say that expanding drilling will do nothing to lower gasoline prices. The truth is that this will send a strong signal to the world markets that the U.S. is serious about producing our resources and bringing more production online. Furthermore, this argument has been used by opponents to American energy production for decades. We can no longer delay and prevent access to our own American resources.
•My colleagues will also propose increasing taxes on American energy production. Yet when has raising taxes ever reduced the price of anything? The answer is never. Higher taxes equal higher prices. Whether it's taxing American energy producers, or imposing a cap-and-trade national energy tax, the Democrats' plans will only further increase the price at the pump and cost jobs.
•My colleagues are likely to reiterate the old 'use it or lose it myth,' claiming that there are thousands of acres of non-producing leases. In reality, use it or lose it is already the law of the land. The moment a company pays for and receives a lease the clock starts clicking. Leases also have a timeline - if action doesn't occur, the lease is lost. In addition, only a third of leases even contain oil and natural gas to produce. Congress can't mandate production on land where there is no energy.
•Finally, my colleagues will undoubtedly attempt to claim that these bills ignore the need to ensure safety. No one has forgotten the tragic Deepwater Horizon accident - especially our Members from the Gulf. However, we also must not forget the economic threat of high gasoline prices and the need to move forward with offshore energy production.
The Administration has started to slowly issue deepwater permits in the Gulf of Mexico, which is direct recognition that it can be done safely and responsibly.
My colleagues on the other side want to act as if nothing has changed and no safety reforms have been made. By doing so, they are completely ignoring reality and the actions of their own party's Administration. They are ignoring the facts that regulations have been enhanced and strengthened; that standards have increased; and that new technologies have been developed, tested and deployed.
Furthermore, H.R. 1229 that we'll debate next week improves safety by making two reforms to current law. 1) It requires that the Secretary issue a permit to drill and 2) requires that the Secretary conduct a safety review.
In 2008, the last time gasoline prices reached $4 per gallon, Congress stepped up to the challenge and took bold action to end the decades-long ban on new offshore drilling. Although the Obama Administration has effectively re-imposed that ban, the American people are once again calling on Congress to act.
By passing H.R. 1230 today, Congress can show the American people that we've heard their concerns and we are taking action.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this bill today to create American jobs, lower gasoline prices and strengthen our energy independence.'
There's alot in the American Energy Initiative that Sen. Klobuchar is on the record as supporting. Here's just a part of those things:
These are the first of an array of bills that will be introduced by our Committee as part of the American Energy Initiative that will focus on expanding renewable energy, onshore production, hydropower, coal, critical minerals, and address offshore revenue sharing and other needed reforms.
People are hurting. The economy is severely damaged as a result of these high oil prices. As a direct result of these high gas prices, groceries cost more, inflation is at its highest in 2 1/2 years, GDP is at an almost-stagnant 1.8% and first-time unemployment claims jumped to 474,000 this week, the highest that's been in 8 months.
We can't support a senator that's that corn-fused. We need a senator who's oriented towards real solutions. If Sen. Klobuchar wants to sponsor a gazillion different bills to show she's doing something, that's her right. Minnesotans don't care about that. Minnesotans only care about things that bring gas and grocery prices and heating bills down.
Thus far, Sen. Klobuchar hasn't provided serious solutions on energy issues. She's operated a PR/photo op machine. That's about it.
Minnesotans need solutions. Minnesotans don't need PR-seeking politicians who aren't serious about putting in place intelligent energy policies.
Posted Thursday, May 5, 2011 7:58 PM
Comment 1 by Terry Stone at 05-May-11 09:55 PM
Workable energy policy is about calories, joules and BTUs that are largely fungible. Klobuchar's high decibel silence on nuclear power is prima facie evidence that she may be the princess of pander but her energy policy is a few gallons short of a full barrel.
While Klobuchar fancies herself tough on domestic energy policy, she will find the law of supply and demand a stern maiden quite disinclined to suffer political fools.
