November 9-12, 2014
Nov 09 01:48 MnSCU's sickening spin Nov 09 12:02 Rosenstone's terrible week, Part II Nov 10 00:17 Alice in Wonderland, SCSU edition Nov 10 14:04 Rejecting senators as presidents Nov 10 14:23 Rosenstone's terrible week, Part III Nov 11 06:48 Spring semester is closer than you think Nov 12 03:10 Anniversary bleg Nov 12 20:15 Dill: Metrocrats don't understand us
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
MnSCU's sickening spin
Saying that MnSCU's spin in this article is dizzying is understatement. It's pathetic, yet frightening simultaneously. Here's an example:
Three years ago, when Rosenstone was hired, MnSCU was looking for someone to light a fire under the sprawling, tradition-bound system to help it adapt to changing times and tighter budgets, said Thomas Renier, now the board chair. 'I heard over and over, we need a transformational leader,' he said. 'And we got one.'
When Jim McCormack announced his retirement, the first question that the MnSCU Board of Trustees should've asked was whether the system needed a major overhaul. I'm not exclusively talking about the universities, though that's certainly in order. The trustees should've asked whether MnSCU's central office needed major revamping. The next question that they should've asked is whether Steven Rosenstone was qualified for that responsibility. This MnSCU statement suggests he wasn't. Here's Rosenstone's qualifications:
Rosenstone has been vice president for scholarly and cultural affairs at the University of Minnesota since 2007. He came to the university in 1996 to serve as dean of the College of Liberal Arts. Under his leadership, the college revamped the undergraduate experience, created state-of-the-art facilities and forged new partnerships with businesses, communities, cultural and civic organizations. Over the years, Rosenstone led numerous university system-wide initiatives including the national conference on Keeping our Faculties of Color and task forces on scholarships, private fundraising, and long-term financial strategy. Rosenstone was awarded the McKnight Presidential Leadership Chair for his service to the university.
Before coming to the university, he was an assistant, associate, and then full professor of political science at Yale University until 1986 when he became a professor of political science at the University of Michigan and program director in the Center for Political Studies. He is the author of four books and numerous scholarly articles on elections, political participation, and the challenges facing higher education. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
In terms of administrative experience, Chancellor Rosenstone's experience was limited. Let's compare that with William Sederburg, then the commissioner of the Utah System of Higher Education:
Sederburg, who serves as chief executive officer of Utah's Board of Regents, has been in his current position since 2008; his duties included developing a statewide higher education plan at the request of the board. Previously, he served as president of Utah Valley University from 2003 to 2008; during his tenure, the former two-year community college expanded to become a four-year regional university with 30,000 students. He was president of Ferris State University, which offers both two-year and four-year degrees, from 1994 to 2003; vice president for public policy and director at the Public Opinion Research Institute from 1991 to 1994; Michigan state senator from 1978 to 1991; president of Survey Research Co. from 1974 to 1991; and postdoctoral fellow at Michigan State University from 1973 to 1975. In 1990, he helped found the Midwestern Higher Education Compact, became its inaugural chair and located its headquarters in Minneapolis. He holds a bachelor's degree in education and political science from Minnesota State University, Mankato, and a master's degree in political science and a doctorate in political science and public administration, both from Michigan State University.
In other words, Dr. Sederburg had a lengthy and distinguished history of running major educational institutions. He'd developed a statewide "higher education plan" in Utah. He'd taken Utah Valley University from being a community college to being a 4-year university. Besides that, Dr. Sederburg was a state senator in Michigan and a "vice president for public policy and director at the Public Opinion Research Institute from 1991 to 1994."
In other words, Dr. Sederburg was exceptionally qualified for the job of running a major institution like MnSCU because he'd run major institutions before. Dr. Rosenstone had never run a major institution like MnSCU.
Then there's this spin:
In July, word leaked that Rosenstone had quietly hired a consulting firm, McKinsey & Co., to help guide the planning for Charting the Future at a cost of $2 million. When faculty leaders asked for a copy of the company's bid proposal, almost all the pages were blacked out.
The news was especially alarming, according to Rosenstone's critics, because the same company had published a 2010 report, 'Winning by Degrees,' touting ways to 'increase productivity' by replacing full-time faculty with temporary instructors and using centrally designed courses. Bute called it a 'pre-canned script,' adding 'we just felt like this was being rammed down our throats.'
Rosenstone says that's untrue, and that McKinsey was hired only to help start the planning process. The final plan, he said, will be designed entirely by teams of faculty, staff, students and administrators.
That last paragraph is insulting. If the final plan is to "be designed entirely by teams of faculty, staff, students and administrators", why did Chancellor Rosenstone and President Potter intimidate Kari Cooper, the president of the Minnesota State University Student Association, into tears at a steering committee hearing? Why did Chancellor Rosenstone announce last Thursday morning that MnSCU and the IFO would start mediation with "the state Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution" when he knows that MnSCU's Collective Bargaining Agreement with the IFO spells out that all mediation be done by the Bureau of Mediation Services?
Further, why did Rosenstone announce that prior to consulting with the IFO? That sounds like something a my-way-or-the-highway kind of guy would do. It doesn't sound like something that a consensus-builder would do.
I don't blame the reporter for MnSCU's spin. She's just reporting the quotes. I'm blaming MnSCU's trustees for their spin. Finally, I'm blaming Chancellor Rosenstone for not being transparent and open to other people's ideas.
Posted Sunday, November 9, 2014 1:48 AM
Comment 1 by No confidence:EVERYWHERE at 09-Nov-14 10:13 AM
With all of the chatter about changing this and that, no confidence votes and 2 million dollar studies what I still find completely and totally insulting was the quiet and covert contract extension with a raise making this boob the highest paid official. Am I the only one out there that thinks this stinks more than the fact he is unqualified, pushy, arrogant (in fact..like Potter who is 4th highest paid) truly a my-way-or-the-highway guy...NOT kind of. These actions should be forwarded to The State Attorney General for a quick review. I believe its criminal. At minimum its criminal for one to have too much power and authority ESPECIALLY when unqualified. I would certainly like to be the one to chart Mr Rosenstone's course to a grand jury ending in an orange jumpsuit
Rosenstone's terrible week, Part II
When Chancellor Rosenstone announced that MnSCU and the IFO were heading to mediation with the Office of Collaboration and Dispute Resolution, he did it as a political stunt. I wrote about that aspect of Rosenstone's stunt in this post . People can and will write that off as a dispute between adversaries. That isn't accurate, though, because that's an oversimplification of what happened.
What happened is that Chancellor Rosenstone was so totally intent on implementing his Charting the Future initiative that he was willing to do anything to make it happen. If that took belittling students to make it happen, that's what he'd do. If you think that's hyperbole, it isn't :
Kari Cooper, president of the Minnesota State University Student Association, said Rosenstone and a campus president attacked her suggestions and questioned her leadership at a recent meeting. 'I left that meeting in tears,' she said. 'I wasn't going to sit there as a student and be talked to like that from people who are supposed to be supporting me and supposed to be collaborating with me.'
FYI- It's been confirmed that the "campus president" at that meeting was SCSU President Earl Potter. That incident triggered the Winona State University Student Senate to jump into that part of the Rosenstone fiasco :
To whom it may concern,
On November 5th, the Winona State University Student Senate (WSUSS) passed a Bill of Particulars regarding Chancellor Rosenstone.
The WSUSS does not take lightly the decision to present this Bill to the Chancellor and to The Board of Trustees. The Bill of Particulars addresses the performance, professionalism, and accountability of Chancellor Rosenstone. Many concerns listed in the Bill are not new and have been brought up by several different stake holder groups over the course of the last year; it is the hope of the Winona State student body that Chancellor Rosenstone addresses these concerns in a timely manner.
The WSUSS is currently considering a Vote of No Confidence in the Chancellor's leadership but wanted to make these issues known before taking any additional action.
Sincerely,
WSUSS President Jessica Hepinstall and V.P. Edward Conlin
That's just their letter. Here's Chancellor Rosenstone's dishonest response:
That's a dishonest statement. Dr. Rosenstone isn't interested in collaboration. That's a major reason why Faculty Senate representatives at 5 universities have conducted votes of no confidence in Chancellor Rosenstone.
'I take very seriously the concerns raised by the Winona State University Student Senate and hope to meet in person as soon as possible to discuss them. We have reached out to the Winona student leadership. I would welcome the opportunity to personally meet with any of our student groups to discuss any topic at any time.'
Verification will follow in Part III of this original reporting series.
Posted Sunday, November 9, 2014 12:02 PM
Comment 1 by Crimson Trace at 09-Nov-14 07:34 PM
Reminds me of the captain of the Titanic after hitting the iceberg. Did he say "change is hard" to his crew and passengers?
Comment 2 by Nick at 09-Nov-14 09:11 PM
Why not copy the University of Michigan whose regents are ELECTED by the public?!!! I have a photo of a UM regents campaign sign from this fall. If Potter were president of the University of Michigan and he ended homecoming, the students at UM would have destroyed his house by now.
Alice in Wonderland, SCSU edition
Are We Living In Wonderland?
by Silence Dogood
The front-page article in the St. Cloud Times on Wednesday, October 22, 2014 proclaimed:
In the article, Interim Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Richard Green is quoted as saying "university officials anticipated the decrease in enrollment, and it's in line with what they have seen in the past several years."
On the same day, Vice President for Finance and Administration Tammy McGee publically unveiled the FY15 budget at a Budget Advisory Committee Meeting. The document released is reproduced below:
The budget for FY15 clearly shows a budget deficit of $9,542,000.
Interim Provost Richard Green is new to the SCSU campus so it might be understandable that he might not be aware of all of the minute details but in what world is a 5.1% enrollment decline and $9,542,000 budget shortfall simply business as usual. In higher education where enrollment is the primary driver of revenue generation, is there another institution that has experienced a 22% enrollment decline with five years of decline willing to accept this as business as usual?
The Provost's statement: "university officials anticipated the decrease in enrollment' could not be correct because if it were, a budget would have been presented that did not have a deficit approaching $10,000,000 dollars! This kind of money simply isn't found in the petty cash! And you might expect that the Provost and Vice President for Finance and Administration would be talking with each other because, on the same day, the Provost says essentially that everything is going according to plan and the CFO says the 'sky is falling.' Perhaps she didn't use the exact words that the 'sky is falling' but it would certainly be appropriate when more than three months into the fiscal year a budget is released that shows the need to cover a deficit amounting to 6.3% of the General Fund Budget! Contrary to Chicken Little's mass hysteria, this time the sky really is falling!
Posted Monday, November 10, 2014 12:17 AM
No comments.
Rejecting senators as presidents
After John McCain lost in 2008, I spoke with a friend about senators becoming presidents. I half-kiddingly said that Republicans should pass a motion that senators should never be allowed to be the GOP's presidential nominee. I know that such a resolution is impossible, which is why I said it in jest. That being said, senators don't run things. They aren't the decider. They're the pontificators. Soon-to-be former Gov. Rick Perry, (R-TX), weighed in on the subject :
Perry, considering a repeat presidential bid in 2016, had just spoken at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library for an event celebrating the 50th anniversary of Reagan's famous "A Time For Choosing" speech. Among his scalding criticisms of Obama, Perry explained the president's failings as due to his background as a U.S. senator, something that happens to apply to several of his would-be challengers for the GOP presidential nomination.
"If you're in the Senate or if you're in the House, you can give a speech and then go home. Governors can't. We have to govern," Perry said, adding, "And the president of the United States, historically, has had to operate that way, too; the ones that were successful. And one of the reasons why this President is not successful is because he's never had that experience."
Asked if the next president will be a senator, Perry said, "No."
It's worth noting that the top-tier candidates on the Democratic side are both senators, too. But I digress.
Gov. Perry is right, though intentionally a bit oversimplistic. Legislators work hard if they're doing their jobs right. That being said, their job is mostly debating legislation. Their work is done during scheduled sessions. Presidents and governors work during sessions, too, to get their legislative agendas passed. During sessions, though, they're also called on to deal with crises, whether it's a president responding to international hot spots or governors responding to public safety crises within their state or on their state's borders.
Then, after the sessions are over, presidents and governors are essentially on call 24/7 the rest of the year. They're never on recess, though President Obama certainly makes it look like he doesn't take the White House with him.
It isn't a stretch to think that Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz think they see the next president of the United States when they look in the mirror each morning. They don't. What accomplishments do these men have? They haven't implemented major reforms like Scott Walker, John Kasich, Perry and Bobby Jindal have. They haven't revived their states' economies like Kasich, Perry and Walker have. The best that Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz can say is that they prevented Sen. Reid and President Obama from doing awful things.
They shouldn't be discredited for that. What they've done isn't insignificant. It just isn't nearly as significant as what Govs. Walker, Jindal, Perry and Kasich have accomplished.
Lest this be just about Republicans, let's ask what Hillary or Elizabeth Warren has accomplished. Hillary's staff noted that she traveled more flight miles than any other Secretary of State in US history. That's nice. She can redeem those miles so she and Bill can take a nice vacation together.
In terms of actual policies implemented, she got 4 American patriots killed in Benghazi by being asleep at the switch. She ignored multiple pleas from Christopher Stevens for enhanced security for the compound in Benghazi. Then she the nerve to say she hadn't heard of those urgent requests.
Nobody will buy that BS in 2016. They didn't buy it in 2012 and they aren't buying it now.
Her first 'accomplishment' was presenting Russia with a reset switch that Russia interpreted as meaning that they could do whatever they wanted in Ukraine and anywhere else in eastern Europe and the middle east. Coddling our enemies (Russia, Iran) and mistreating our allies (Israel, the British and Iraq) isn't what presidential resumes are built on.
As pathetic as Hillary's list of accomplishments is, Elizabeth Warren's list of accomplishments is more pathetic. In fact, it's nonexistent.
It's still early but I'd argue that 2016 is shaping up to be GOP year for taking back the White House. Rick Perry has presided over the strongest economy in the nation. Scott Walker passed collective bargaining reform, then staved off the unions' attempts to kill the reforms. He also passed a $2.2 billion tax cut while creating 110,000 jobs. Bobby Jindal passed school choice laws that are improving educational outcomes in Louisiana. John Kasich's economic policies have revived Ohio. He cut taxes while eliminating an $8 billion deficit upon entering office.
By comparison, the Democrats have a pair of wannabes as their top tier.
Posted Monday, November 10, 2014 2:04 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 10-Nov-14 04:25 PM
Gary:
Forgive me for asking. Your wannibie list is Hillary and Joe B.?
Mind you Hillary's work as SOS has shown that she isn't qualified for the job anymore and technically the same applies to Joe because of his work as VP not to mention you can make an argument during the last two campaigns he is seeing things that aren't true (the same applies to the current President).
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 10-Nov-14 08:37 PM
I don't care if the Republican nominee is a brilliant Senator like Ted Cruz or a governor like Walker, or even Perry or Kasich -- as long as he's a conservative I can support. Correct stands on the issues are more important than Governor or Senator.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 10-Nov-14 09:31 PM
I strongly disagree. I agree that having conservative positions is important but it's only part of the equation. Running things is an entirely different mindset. Senators don't have it. Throughout US history, there have only been 3 senators elected from the Senate. Two of the 3 were outright disasters. The other was assassinated.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 11-Nov-14 09:35 AM
Gary:
I think your count is dramatically off on Presidents who came from the Senate.
There are four who came directly from the US Senate. Garfield (my almanac says he was a Senator elect), Harding, Kennedy, and the current one Obama. Two of them were assassinated (Garfield and Kennedy) while a third died in office (Harding).
To go on I think you can add some more to your list who went from the Senate to be Vice President and then become President. If you want to use the word disaster this list includes Van Buren, Andrew Johnson, Harry Truman (okay I think it's not fair to call him a disaster), and Lyndon Johnson (his disaster still being felt today).
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Rosenstone's terrible week, Part III
Chancellor Rosenstone's week from hell, which I wrote about in this article and this post , is filled with disturbing information. The most disturbing information is that the MnSCU chancellor and a university president, Steven Rosenstone and Earl Potter respectively, intimidated a student named Kari Cooper. That's why the Winona State University Student Senate drafted this Bill of Particulars:
Follow this link to read Winona's Bill of Particulars in pdf form.
Overall, the Chancellor has on multiple occasions acted in a disrespectful and aloof manner.
Last night, I spoke with Edward Conlin, the Vice President of the Winona State University Student Senate, about their Bill of Particulars. He confirmed that the Cooper incident was part of what caused them to draft their Bill of Particulars and to eventually cast a vote of no-confidence in Chancellor Rosenstone. Conlin emphasized the fact that they didn't take this task lightly, adding that their meeting lasted 5 hours.
Conlin added that they were upset that Chancellor Rosenstone hid the McKinsey and Co. consulting contract from everyone, starting with the Minnesota State University Student Association. The MSUSA asked Chancellor Rosenstone directly what the cost of implementing Charting the Future (CtF). According to the Winona Student Senate, Chancellor Rosenstone said that the cost of implementing CtF would mostly be incidental costs on things like travel costs and meetings. When the $2,000,000 contract with McKinsey and Co. was brought to light, that rightly upset the Winona Student Senate:
Although not required to, the Chancellor in particular, and the Central Office did not and currently have not provided adequate transparency of The McKinsey and Company contract. A heavily redacted version of the document was only made available when the initial contract was discovered and leaked by local media. With regards to our public higher educational system, this information is deserved especially with the cost of $2 million dollars.
Conlin confirmed that Chancellor Rosenstone's secrecy was a major driver in their Student Senate's decision to vote their vote of no confidence in the Rosenstone administration.
Based on the information I've written, the chief hallmarks of the Rosenstone administration are secrecy, intimidation and spending money foolishly. It isn't surprising that faculty senate representatives and student senates don't have confidence in Chancellor Rosenstone.
Posted Monday, November 10, 2014 2:23 PM
No comments.
Spring semester is closer than you think
Spring Semester Is Wasting Away!
by Silence Dogood
From the website for the Office of Strategy, Planning and Research, you can see a plot of the historic FYE enrollment from FY2000 through FY2014.
One of the most striking features of this graph is that over this period of time the enrollment in FY14 (12,381) is 279 FYE lower than the enrollment for FY00 (12,660). The final enrollment number for FY15 will not be known until after the end of Spring semester. However, enrollment for Summer'14 was down 9.0% and Fall'14 enrollment is currently down 5.1%. As a result, the enrollment decline for FY15 will most likely be over 5% for the year - which would be the fourth year in a row of annual declines over 5%!
On the website, the data is also broken down by semester. A portion of the graph showing the Fall and Spring semesters for the last five academic years is shown below:
A quick look at the two graphs reveals similarities except that the plot for Fall semester shows a maximum for F'10, while the plot for Spring semester simply shows a monotonic decrease in enrollment. Other than that, the two plots look very similar.
However, when you look more closely at the graphs, it appears that the rate of decline for Spring semester is greater than the rate of decline Fall semester. This can be quantified by calculating the percentage change in enrollment from Fall to Spring semesters as shown in the following figure:
Clearly, the downward trend in FYE enrollment from Fall to Spring semester is getting larger! From FY10 through FY14, the FYE enrollment declined 18.0%--a decline that took four years to achieve. However, the decline in enrollment from Fall'13 to Spring'14 is a shocking one-year decline of -12.9%.
Spring semester enrollments historically have always been lower than the prior Fall semester. However, in four years the rate of decline, Fall to Spring, has more than doubled from -5.9% to -12.9%, which corresponds to a 117% increase in the percent of decline! If this had been an increase in the rate of increase it would be impressive but as an increase in the rate of decline it is potentially terrifying!
The Fall semester FYE enrollment shows a decline of 14.7% over the period Fall'09 through Fall'13. The Spring semester FYE enrollment shows a decline of 21.0% over the period Spring'10 through Spring'14. Clearly, FYE enrollment at SCSU is headed dramatically in the wrong direction. Unfortunately, as bad as it looks for Fall semester, the decline in Spring semester is nearly 50% worse!
The enrollment as of September 13, 2014 was 5,509.6 FYE. Clearly, this is not the final enrollment number for Fall semester. However, a year-to-date comparison shows a decline of 348.5 FYE from the prior Fall, which represents a decline of 5.9%. If the final enrollment for Fall semester is only down 5% from the prior year, the FYE enrollment would be 5,774. If the percentage decline for Spring semester is the same as it was for Spring'14, the FYE enrollment for Spring'15 would be 5,029. Adding in the 916 FYE from Summer'14 gives a FY15 total of 11,719 FYE, which is 5.3% down from the previous year.
Clearly, the enrollment estimate of the Data Analytics Group last March of a decline of 3.2% is not as accurate a prediction as one might like. Even the revision of the estimated decline done in the summer that increased and broadened the decline to a range of 4-5% did not accurately predict a 5.3% decline.
Ultimately, increasing Fall enrollments is not going to be a successful strategy if the decline for Spring semester continues to increase. Something needs to be done to find a way to keep a larger percentage of the Fall semester students coming back for Spring semester. The first step is recognizing that there is a problem. This is something that doesn't seem to occur too often at SCSU unless it is to blame and then fire someone. The second step is trying to analyze the reason(s) for the continuing decrease in the percentage of students returning for Spring semester. The last step is implementing a strategy to reverse the trend and increase the percentage of returning students. Let's hope that we can at least start with step one. Otherwise, Spring semester might be wasting away as much as Summer School where from Summer'10 to Summer'14, the enrollment has dropped a staggering 30.9%!
Posted Tuesday, November 11, 2014 6:48 AM
No comments.
Anniversary bleg
Next Wednesday marks the tenth anniversary of my starting blogging. Back then, the blog was known as Common Sense Conservative and it was on BlogSpot, not WordPress.
Through the years, I've offered lots of predictions, many of which were wrong. That being said, I've gotten quite a few things right. I was one of the first bloggers to call for defeating Mark Olson after this:
On August 16, 2007, Mark Olson was convicted of Domestic Assault-Misdemeanor-Commits Act With Intent to Cause Fear of Immediate Bodily Harm or Death.
I was the first blogger to write that the DFL's intent was to establish a single-payer health care system . While the DFL hasn't accomplished that, Democrats have pushed us to the brink.
I'm the blogger who first started stirring up trouble about the DFL's attempts to shut down the PolyMet project. I even broke the story about how Gov.-Elect Dayton planned on nominating Paul Aasen , then the head of the MCEA, to be his first commissioner of the MPCA.
I've been fortunate to break lots of stories, especially in the last 4 years. My favorite, though, was this one in 2007:
I just got off the phone with Steve Gottwalt, who had some shocking news from the Capitol. Today, at a committee hearing, Cy Thao told Steve 'When you guys win, you get to keep your money. When we win, we take your money.' This was Thao's explanation as to how the DFL plans on paying for all the spending increases they promised their special interest friends.
If you appreciate my reporting, I'd appreciate it if you'd drop a few coins in my tip jar at the top of the right sidebar. All contributions are appreciated.
Make sure and stop past on the 19th. I have a special Tenth Anniversary post planned for the occasion.
Posted Wednesday, November 12, 2014 3:10 AM
No comments.
Dill: Metrocrats don't understand us
This article is mostly about how the Range delegation will get along with the incoming GOP majority in the House. Still, there's a paragraph that's highlight worthy:
Dill said he believes the House Republican majority will be pro-mining. And he said metro-centric DFLers, including some who were defeated, have never asked him about going fishing, snowmobiling and ATVing. ' They don't understand us and our lifestyle ,' Dill said.
I'm certain that Rep. Dill didn't think that statement through but he's right. The metro-centric part of the DFL doesn't understand the Range's people or lifestyle. I'd add that that's because they only care about metro issues with one exception. The environmental activist wing of the DFL is steadfastly anti-mining. They're unmistakably the dominant wing in the DFL. That fact isn't likely to change anytime soon.
The DFL is the 'Party of the Highest Bidder'. When it comes to their agenda, they'll side with the faction that will contribute the most to their re-election campaigns. If there are competing special interests, like miners and environmental activists, they'll attempt the political equivalent of a high wire act. That's what they did this year.
Rangers should take note of the other thing Rep. Dill said:
Dill said he believes the House Republican majority will be pro-mining.
I'll guarantee that the House GOP will be pro-mining. Since 2009, Republicans have been firmly pro-mining. That's been the best kept political secret of the past 4 years.
State Rep. Jason Metsa, DFL-Virginia, took a positive view of the House change in leadership. 'Rangers will be able to work with Speaker Daudt. It will be a new experience, but I am looking forward to learning how to navigate in the minority,' he said in an email.
Republicans, I'm certain, will do everything to make Rep. Metsa's time in the minority a pleasant and, hopefully, long-lasting experience.
Posted Wednesday, November 12, 2014 8:15 PM
No comments.
