October 1-2, 2017
Oct 01 03:54 Kurt Daudt's eye-opening op-ed Oct 01 19:38 Defending the indefensible Oct 02 02:37 To Speaker Daudt, Sen. Gazelka Oct 02 09:19 Supreme Court supremely spineless? Oct 02 10:35 Sen. Franken, have you no shame?
Prior Months: Jan Feb ~ May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Kurt Daudt's eye-opening op-ed
Earlier this week, I wrote about Paul Gazelka's Strib op-ed in this post but I missed Speaker Daudt's op-ed . I'm upset with myself that I did. That's because Speaker Daudt's op-ed opened my eyes to something that I hadn't considered previously.
The first paragraph that caught my attention was when Speaker Daudt wrote "That's why at the end of the last legislative session, I was so proud of the historically productive results we achieved. A Republican-led House and Senate worked with our Democratic governor and balanced the budget while investing a historic amount into roads and bridges; boosted funding to our schools; passed Real ID enabling Minnesotans to travel; lowered health insurance premiums; and reduced taxes for millions of Minnesotans. Most important, we did it together."
Lots of people have written about the fact that this was a productive session. There's no disputing that fact. The paragraph that got my undivided attention was where Speaker Daudt wrote "The Legislature didn't get everything it wanted, and the governor didn't get everything he wanted. But in working alongside one another, we brought the session to a productive conclusion. Then, perhaps after hearing complaints from members of his own party, Gov. Mark Dayton expressed second thoughts about the compromises he had negotiated. Despite personally having agreed to each and every one of the bills, including the amount and provisions within the tax relief bill, the governor tried to go back on his word. He line-item-vetoed funding for the Legislature in an attempt to force us back to the negotiating table."
Think about that a split-second. Neither the governor nor the legislature got everything they wanted but they negotiated a deal that both supposedly could live with. After Gov. Dayton agreed to the size of the tax relief bill and the provisions in it, the legislature passed the bill and sent it to Gov. Dayton. Despite the agreement and the fact that Gov. Dayton got lots of the things he'd prioritized, Gov. Dayton line-item vetoed the funding for the legislature.
Gov. Dayton said he vetoed their funding to coerce the legislature into renegotiating the Tax Bill. I'm betting that isn't why he vetoed it. I'm betting that his special interest allies told him that they were vehemently opposed to the tax bill for ideological reasons. In 2011, Gov. Dayton reneged on a budget agreement he'd negotiated with then-Speaker Zellers and then-Senate Majority Leader Koch. They reached an agreement. They returned to their caucuses to tell them they had a deal. When they returned to Gov. Dayton's office, they learned that Rep. Thissen and Sen. Bakk talked Gov. Dayton into reneging on the deal that he'd agreed to and initialed.
There's a significant part of Gov. Dayton that simply can't sign a bill unless he's certain he's getting the better end of the agreement. He's simply too rigid. That's why 3 of the 4 budget sessions during Gov. Dayton's time in office required a special session. What's particularly upsetting is that Gov. Dayton won't admit that he's attempting to preserve his bargaining leverage when the legislature returns in February. Both sides know that the legislature has some reserve funds that they can use but they both know that it isn't enough to fund the legislature for the rest of the biennium.
It's also upsetting to hear Gov. Dayton accuse the legislature of lying to him and to the Supreme Court:
Gov. Dayton needs to quit with his my-way-or-the-highway shtick. It's getting old.
Posted Sunday, October 1, 2017 3:54 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 01-Oct-17 06:36 AM
Not defending Gov. Dayton but he probably believes he is telling the truth when he says the GOP lied to him because the guy doesn't seem to have the metal capacity and probably forgot what he negotiated earlier on. If that is the case then he hasn't had the mental capacity since being elected since he sings things and then is surprised at a later date at what he signed. Just goes to show that the DFL will vote for anyone with a D behind their name.
Defending the indefensible
Mike Lupica used to be a sports writer. Now, he fancies himself as a political pundit. Based on this article , I'd argue he's better off as a sports writer because he's clueless as a political pundit.
In Lupica's article, he defense San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulin-Cruz, saying that she "isn't an ingrate or an opportunist or political grandstander. She isn't somebody who deserved to get trolled on social media because she was desperate to get help for her city and its people. She sure isn't a tool of the Democratic Party. She happens to be a hero of her people. American people. You don't pick a fight with somebody like that."
It's pretty apparent that Mr. Lupica didn't do his homework. Yulin-Cruz is all of those things. While she's grandstanding on CNN, other mayors are getting to the FEMA co-ordination center to help prioritize the delivery of supplies to their citizens. It's difficult to believe that she isn't an ingrate after watching her whine endlessly about how FEMA isn't getting the job done while other mayors praise the Trump administration's preparedness and execution of getting supplies to their communities. Check out this interview:
Had Mr. Lupica done his homework, he'd know that the other mayors were praising the Trump administration's performance. Apparently, Mr. Lupica isn't into doing his homework. Instead, Lupica spent his column taking cheap shots at President Trump:
Trump has a right to defend the work of FEMA and first responders in Puerto Rico, once he managed to shift his attention to Hurricane Maria from Hurricane Kaepernick. But of course there was a way to do it without suggesting that Puerto Ricans weren't doing enough to help themselves, as if they somehow weren't bailing water fast enough, or looking for clean water hard enough.
Mr. Lupica apparently hasn't heard of a management tool called delegating. It's what entrepreneurs do all the time. First, Mr. Trump hired Brock Long to be his FEMA administrator. Long's reputation is sterling. His confirmation proves that he has impressive bipartisan support :
The man helping lead the federal government's response to Hurricane Harvey and the massive floods hitting coastal Texas is a well-respected emergency manager who was confirmed to his post earlier this year in a 95 to 4 vote.
Long is widely respected in his field and has been working in emergency management for decades. "We couldn't have picked a finer leader," Tom Bossert, a homeland security adviser to President Trump, told NPR over the weekend. "He's had state director experience; he's had FEMA experience. He's absolutely the top of the top."
Lupica wants us to believe that the man who got rave reviews for his performance during Harvey and Irma suddenly fell apart? The other thing that Mr. Lupica wants us to believe is that the mayors of other cities who are praising President Trump and Brock Long are wrong but Mayor Yulin-Cruz is somehow a victim? The odds of that happening are microscopic.
Rather, I'll chalk this up to the rantings of a partisan Democrat who doesn't want President Trump to succeed.
Posted Sunday, October 1, 2017 7:38 PM
No comments.
To Speaker Daudt, Sen. Gazelka
To: Speaker Daudt, Sen. Gazelka
From: Gary Gross, Chief troublemaker, Uppity Peasants Brigade
Subject: Gov. Dayton standoff
Gentlemen, I'm proud of you for standing your ground in this fight against Gov. Dayton. Don't renegotiate the tax bill that Gov. Dayton signed. Instead, tell Gov. Dayton that you'll broadcast the fact that Gov. Dayton and the DFL didn't put a high priority on serving their constituents.
Instead of renegotiating the tax bill, the House should immediately submit a clean funding bill that funds the legislature for the rest of the biennium. Pass it ASAP, then send it to the Senate. If Gov. Dayton vetoes the clean funding bill, I'd schedule an override vote immediately. If the House or Senate votes to sustain Gov. Dayton's veto, tell each outstate DFL legislator that voted to sustain Gov. Dayton's veto that they'd better prepare for the onslaught of advertising that's heading their direction. Tell these DFL legislators that their constituents will hear that they voted against the GOP tax relief package for farmers, small businesses and the middle class. Tell these DFL legislators that their constituents will hear about their votes to keep the legislature shut down, too.
Let them know that voting with Gov. Dayton will come at a political price.
Gentlemen, tell the DFL that listening to their special interest allies will cost them bigtime this election cycle. Gov. Dayton told Tom Hauser that he wants to drag you back to the negotiating table because he's worried that the government might run a deficit. Like you, I've paid attention to Gov. Dayton's message from the start of his administration until his lame-duck year. Not once has Gov. Dayton or his DFL allies said a thing about being worried that families have enough to put a roof over their head, save for retirement or for their children's college education or help meet their bills.
Thanks for standing tall. Thanks for not letting Gov. Dayton's special interest allies bully you. Keep up the good work.
Posted Monday, October 2, 2017 2:37 AM
No comments.
Supreme Court supremely spineless?
Articles like this one verify something that I've suspected since the Supreme Court's initial ruling in the Legislature's lawsuit against Gov. Dayton's line-item veto fiasco. It verifies that these justices are either spineless or they're politically motivated.
Last week, the Supreme Court "demanded more answers about the budget clash between DFL Gov. Mark Dayton and the Republican-controlled Legislature." The article continues, saying "To be clear, the court requires specific statements that identify all funds the Legislature may use,' said the Thursday order, signed by Supreme Court Chief Justice Lorie Gildea. The word 'all' in her order was in italics."
That's a dodge. With all due respect to Chief Justice Gildea, that's BS. That's because this doesn't settle the constitutional issue raised when Gov. Dayton used his line-item veto to cripple the legislative branch. The question that the Court hasn't addressed is whether Gov. Dayton's constitutional authority is absolute. Sam Hanson, Gov. Dayton's attorney, insisted that it is. That's BS. Frankly, he should have his license suspended for making such a bad faith argument.
First, finding out how much money the legislature has isn't relevant because Gov. Dayton vetoed the legislature's operating budget for the entire biennium. Next, finding out how much money the legislature has doesn't determine whether the people have the right to a fully functioning legislative branch. The Supreme Court has essentially ruled that a governor's authority to control a budget is greater than the people's right to be represented.
If the Supreme
Chief Justice Gildea, if you won't stand up for the people's right to representation, then you'll have to go. Ditto with the other justices that voted with you.
UPDATE: I just sent the Supreme Court of Minnesota this email:
I've written something about the Supreme Court's unwillingness (thus far) to issue a FINAL RULING on whether a governor's right to a line-item veto is more important than the people's right to representation at the state capitol.
It's time to make a final ruling on which constitutional provision is most important.
Posted Monday, October 2, 2017 9:33 AM
No comments.
Sen. Franken, have you no shame?
When I wrote this post , I hadn't heard of Hannah Scherlacher. When I finish writing this post, Sen. Franken will wish he'd never heard of Hannah. In my post, I wrote about Sen. Franken's reliance on ratings from the Southern Poverty Law Center, aka the SPLC, during Amy Coney-Barrett's confirmation hearing. To hear Sen. Franken tell it, SPLC is a neutral arbiter of who is qualified to be a federal judge. The truth is that SPLC is a bunch of bottom-feeding low-lifes who have stockpiled tons of cash in accounts in the Caribbean.
Sen. Franken, what part of that sounds legitimate? But I digress.
Hannah's op-ed questions SPLC's integrity from a personal standpoint. In her op-ed, Hannah wrote "It's an understatement to say that I was dumbfounded as to how I ended up on the Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) LGBTQ hate-list - I have never said or done anything to indicate hate for the LGBTQ community. When I called to inquire, SPLC informed me that I am guilty because I did a radio interview with Family Research Council Radio (FRC). I am a program coordinator for The Leadership Institute's Campus Reform. org. The segment was about socialism, but because FRC holds traditional family values, I was labeled an LGBT-hater just for being a guest on the show. No LGBT topics even came-up."
Sen. Franken, have you no shame?
What US senator would rely on sloppily-gathered information from a bunch of bottom-feeders like the SPLC? Ms. Scherlacher's sin was to do an interview with the Family Research Council, an organization whose mission statement states that their "mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a Christian worldview" and whose vision "is a culture in which all human life is valued, families flourish, and religious liberty thrives."
The FRC's vision and mission earned it a spot on SPLC's hate map. That's significant because that map has helped cause physical pain:
Reckless and irresponsible hate-labeling not only stifles free speech and expression, it empowers and emboldens vicious groups and individuals to violently attack people. Consider the 2012 Family Research Council shooting, when a man walked into the organization's office in Washington, D.C., with 100 rounds of ammunition and 15 Chick-fil-A sandwiches. He planned to kill as many staff members as possible and smear the sandwiches in their faces. He said he chose his target based on SPLC's Hate Map.
This is more than ironic:
Nowhere is the danger more real than on our college campuses where Antifa, By Any Means Necessary, and other domestic terror groups ( which are not found on any SPLC hate list ) now feel emboldened to attack conservative students and shut down events under the guise of, ironically, fighting fascism, hate and white supremacism.
Some of the organizations found on the SPLC's Hate Map are legitimate hate groups. It's indisputable that the KKK, Holocaust deniers and the Skinheads deserve to be on that map. Being a traditional values Christian shouldn't land a person on SPLC's hate map, though.
I'll close this post with Hannah's closing argument:
Groups like the SPLC threaten our constitutional rights and the very fabric that makes this nation great. We need to start pushing back. If this trend of bullying and ostracizing anyone with a different opinion continues, we can only expect a chilling, mob-rule effect and the suppression of speech and ideas in this country.
I am calling on SPLC to remove me from this list and stop engaging in the game of identity fear politics. I urge all Americans who have been bullied, silenced, and pushed into a corner by radical groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center to push back too.
Amen, Hannah.
Posted Monday, October 2, 2017 10:35 AM
No comments.
