November 13-14, 2017
Nov 13 10:07 Treating symptoms, not fixing problems Nov 13 17:02 Anti-mining, anti-infrastructure DFL Nov 13 20:29 SCSU CFO is leaving early Nov 14 01:47 City Council rejects First Amendment Nov 14 11:23 Feinstein's flimsy Franken defense
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Treating symptoms, not fixing problems
This LTE has a helpless feel to it that's sad to see. When the writer says "A quick google search yields a third: Between 20 and 25 percent of mall will close within five years and Credit Suisse estimates that a record 8,600 stores will close this year, according to Money.com. Larson closes by noting ' ... both will likely yield to something as yet unimagined within our lifetime.' Allow me to imagine that some of these shuttered malls should be repurposed to house the homeless - 'The fastest-growing segment of the homeless population is families with children. About two-fifths (41 percent) of the homeless population is made up of families,' according to the Huffington Post."
What a blithering idiot. No, let's not transition these malls into homeless shelters. Let's fix the problem that President Obama created. Let's fix the economy so people, families especially, can find good-paying jobs that support families. For eight years, Democrats have whined about income inequality and raising the minimum wage. That's Bernie Sanders' economic message. Since then, it's been co-opted by Elizabeth Warren nationally and Rebecca Otto here in Minnesota.
It's a recipe for disaster but have Republicans said enough to highlight the fact that Sanders' message is one of short- and long-term economic disaster? What's unfortunately happened is that there are too many crony capitalists in the GOP. We need unabashed, full-throated Jack Kemp-Ronald Reagan capitalists.
President Trump is on the right track. He's already outperforming President Obama by leaps and bounds. Economic growth is returning. Jobs are being created. Consumer confidence is surging. Why isn't that the Republicans' message? It's just a hunch but I'm betting that the GOPe doesn't want to give up power. I'm betting they'd rather Trump fail than give up their positions of power. (Vin Weber and Paul Manafort fit into that category.)
First, it's time to stand up to the Weber-Manafort wing of the GOPe. After that, it's time to obliterate the Sanders-Warren-Otto wing of the Democratic Party. The sooner it happens, the sooner we'll be able to stop thinking about treating economic symptoms and start fixing economic problems.
That can't happen fast enough.
Posted Monday, November 13, 2017 10:07 AM
No comments.
Anti-mining, anti-infrastructure DFL
Dan Fabian's LTE highlights the difference between the DFL and the GOP. Rep. Fabian stated "Too many members of the DFL Party, nearly all of whom reside hundreds of miles from the Line 3 project, are opposed to the project, even if it meets all regulatory requirements." Later in the LTE, Rep. Fabian said "Republicans are unified in support of replacing this aging oil pipeline." That's indisputable. Republicans overwhelmingly support these types of infrastructure projects because it strengthens the economy. The DFL, meanwhile, love 'infrastructure' projects that further their social engineering agenda. Think SWLRT.
Possibly the best paragraph of Rep. Fabian's LTE is where he wrote "In addition to decisive support for the project, Republicans recently delivered common-sense reforms for the Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board, clarified the appeals process for permits to mine, developed the ATV trail system for outdoor enthusiasts and tourism, and provided significant tax relief to middle-class families and workers."
Hooray! Republicans everywhere need to adopt this model ASAP. Rep. Fabian told voters what he's for. Rep. Fabian listed the Republican Party's accomplishments, too. Rep. Fabian told people that his focus was on making their lives better. Reforming the IRRRB is a positive step that's long overdue.
Republicans have demonstrated strong support for policies that will help grow the economy, boost good-paying jobs, and ensure the long-term sustainability of communities in northern Minnesota.
This is something for Republicans to be fired up about. If Republicans highlight their positive agenda and a strong pro-growth gubernatorial candidate, they can accomplish something that wasn't believed possible 10 years ago: unified Republican governance in Minnesota.
It's time to stop settling for watered-down Bernie Sanders policies. It's time to sell full-throated Kemp-Reagan optimistic capitalism. We didn't worry about income inequality during the Reagan years because people were prospering. The BS that Bernie Sanders and Rebecca Otto are peddling is essentially 'life-isn't-fair-economics'.
Rep. Fabian did Republicans a great service by writing this LTE. It's what Republicans should run on in 2018.
Posted Monday, November 13, 2017 5:02 PM
No comments.
SCSU CFO is leaving early
Last week, I reported that Ashish Vaidya, St. Cloud State's interim president, had accepted the president's position at Northern Kentucky University . At the time, I wrote that "First, it's impossible for me to believe that this was a difficult decision. The University's CFO is leaving. Programs are being reduced in size. Enrollment is down. Further, the deficits keep 'arriving' annually. Additionally, President Vaidya hasn't been at the University very long. What part of that sounds like a dream job scenario?"
Today, I got word that SCSU's CFO, who already was leaving at the end of the fiscal year, has accelerated that decision. This afternoon, a loyal reader of LFR sent me a forwarded email from Ashish K. Vaidya, soon to be the former interim president at St. Cloud State. According to the forwarded email, "In early October, I informed campus that Tammy McGee, Vice President for Finance and Administration, was resigning from her position at St. Cloud State University at the end of the academic year. Vice President McGee recently informed me that other professional opportunities will require an earlier departure. I have accepted her resignation effective Jan. 5, 2018. This week, she will finalize various projects to support the transition and beginning Nov. 17, she will be on vacation until her resignation date. Effective today, the division of Finance and Administration will report directly to the Office of the President to make sure the university maintains consistent leadership as we continue our efforts to enhance our financial stability. The search for a permanent replacement will begin shortly and Vice President Wanda Overland will serve as chair. AGB Search, the same firm conducting the national search for the next president, will conduct the search. I will update the campus community on the search process as more details are available."
Let's be blunt. The chances of someone of stature applying for the St. Cloud State president's position aren't great. Pretending to conduct a routine nationwide search is foolish. This isn't a routine situation. The next CFO will get hit with an impossible situation. The next president will face annual multi-million dollar deficits and declining enrollment. The odds of attracting someone experienced to either position are slim.
What I find appalling is President Vaidya saying that "the division of Finance and Administration will report directly to the Office of the President to make sure the university maintains consistent leadership as we continue our efforts to enhance our financial stability . " What financial stability? Seriously? What leadership should St. Cloud State expect from the president who's got 1 foot out the door and the other on a banana peel? I understand why President Vaidya wants to project positivity but who's he kidding?
It's understatement to say that St. Cloud State can't survive long with this much instability. What's needed is a local search, not a nationwide search. The person needs to a) have a plan and b) know the terrain both from a management standpoint and from a community relations standpoint. Finally, the person needs to be a leader. We haven't had a leader at St. Cloud State in years.
Posted Monday, November 13, 2017 8:29 PM
No comments.
City Council rejects First Amendment
According to quotes from this article , the St. Cloud City Council doesn't like the First Amendment. This isn't an opinion. That sentiment comes through loud and clear when Jenny Berg quoted Carol Lewis as saying "People were extremely angry with me for limiting time and number (of speakers). Now what if I limited topic? My point is we would have had a riot on our hands."
The City Council already limits what citizens can talk about during open forum. According to the article, the "council's rules of order state residents can speak at open forums for two minutes on topics not on the agenda. Refugee resettlement became a topic on the agendas when council members Jeff Goerger and Jeff Johnson asked to discuss resolutions during the discussion portion of the meeting." Having watched the Oct. 23 and Nov. 6 meetings, I can state with certainty that Council President Lewis indeed limited the citizens' speeches to subjects not on the agenda.
That's a violation of the First Amendment , which states "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." It's well-established fact that the Constitution is a limiting document written to restrict the federal government. There's nothing in the Constitution that permits the government, whether it's a city council or the US Senate or anything in between, to tell its citizens what subjects it will permit. The First Amendment says that people have "the right to peaceably assemble" and "to petition the government" about its grievances.
The government is prohibited by the First Amendment from telling its citizens what they can't talk about. This is telling, too:
Council member Dave Masters said he is in favor of the open forum, but wants a civil discussion. "Some of the speakers we've had recently I felt went over that line," Masters said, saying some speakers attacked the City Council or specific members. He said he has an issue with people "grandstanding" in front of the camera.
A politician who has a problem with citizens grandstanding. Seriously? That's rich. It'd be nice if we lived in a society where all issues were solved through civil discussion. That isn't the society we're living in. Further, the government can't limit speech, even if it's grandstanding speech. Then there's this:
City Administrator Matt Staehling suggested the council consider moving the open forum to the end of the meeting so residents can talk about whatever topic they want, even if it was on the agenda. "It might be easier to manage," he said. Staehling said some other cities allow people to register to speak at the open forum ahead of time with the city clerk; those people then have priority at the meeting.
Again, the First Amendment already gives people the right to "talk about whatever topic they want." That's addressed by the clause stating that citizens have the right "to petition the government for a redress of grievances." The definition of grievances is "a wrong considered as grounds for complaint, or something believed to cause distress." The definition of redress is "the setting right of what is wrong."
The government can't tell citizens that they can't address something that's causing them distress or worry. Government might state its preferences but it can't enforce their preferences if their preferences don't agree with the Constitution.
This is troubling:
Johnson said he had concerns with the council not following its rules of order for the past month, and was frustrated with how Goerger's resolution "in support of a just and welcoming community" was presented to the City Council at the beginning of the Oct. 23 meeting and then voted on that night.
The Council didn't follow its rules that night. The City Clerk admitted that Councilman Goerger's resolution wasn't included in Councilman Johnson's packet of information for the Oct. 23 meeting even though it was received on the Thursday before the Oct. 23 meeting. That means Councilman Goerger's resolution was intentionally hidden from Councilman Johnson.
BTW, that's a violation of City Council Rule # 6, which states "All items of business before the Council for the first time shall be listed as new business or on the Consent Agenda with a notation indicating the item is new business. Official action may not be taken if any Council Person objects to action being taken on the item." Councilman Johnson certainly objected to voting on Councilman Goerger's resolution because he said he hadn't had time to read it.
The rules don't mean anything with Council President Lewis or to most of the members of the Council. Most of the City Council members just care about winning. If they have to break the rules to win, they're ok with that.
Posted Tuesday, November 14, 2017 1:47 AM
No comments.
Feinstein's flimsy Franken defense
Sen. Dianne Feinstein's literary defense of Al Franken is flimsy, using platitudes instead of logic. For instance, Sen. Feinstein wrote "Senate Republicans have done a head-spinning 180 on the value of the 'blue slip,' a 100-year-old tool that gives home state senators the ability to sign off on judicial nominees in their states. This practice ensures that the White House consults senators on lifetime appointments and that nominees are mainstream and well-suited to serve in their states."
Theoretically, that last statement is true. The details matter, though. Al Franken abused the system by saying that Minnesota Supreme Court Justice David Stras was too conservative even though Alan Page, a retired liberal Minnesota Supreme Court Justice, spoke glowingly of Justice Stras's temperament and intellectual integrity.
Minnesotans who've paid attention to this situation know that Sen. Franken was using the blue slip to slow down confirmation of Justice Stras. This wasn't about making sure President Trump's nominees were sufficiently mainstream. We knew Justice Stras was because of his ABA rating and because of who endorsed him.
Here's what Sen. Feinstein is really worried about:
This move would give President Trump free rein to pick whomever he wants and stack our federal courts with young, ideological judges preferred by Washington-based right-wing groups like the Federalist Society and Judicial Crisis Network.
Sen. Feinstein didn't utter a peep when President Obama worked with Sen. Reid to pack the DC Circuit Court of Appeals with young left-wing ideologues. Now that it's the Democrats that aren't getting their way, Democrats are whining. I'll tell Sen. Feinstein what President Obama told Eric Cantor, which is "Elections have consequences. We won."
The second false claim is that the blue slip is being abused because senators have never before used it to ensure the White House consults them on judicial nominees.
Sen. Feinstein isn't telling the whole truth on this. Sen. Franken isn't using the blue slip to ensure that the Trump administration consults with senators. Sen. Franken is using the blue slip as a one-man veto of conservative judicial nominees. It's that simple.
It isn't a secret that Sen. Franken is part of the Resistance Movement. Also, it isn't a secret that he's one of the most partisan hacks imaginable.
Posted Tuesday, November 14, 2017 11:23 AM
No comments.
