October 18-20, 2010
Oct 18 08:31 Oberstar's Clout Questioned Oct 18 14:44 Metro DFL legislators distancing themselves from Dayton Oct 18 20:11 A.J. Kern For Sauk Rapids-Rice School Board Oct 19 02:44 Critz Afflicted With Daschle-itis Oct 19 13:32 Chip vs. Oberstar Debate Coverage Oct 19 17:08 Chip vs. Oberstar: A Recap Oct 19 19:18 Cravaack, Sutton Call Out Oberstar Oct 20 02:55 Oberstar's Coordination Dilemma Oct 20 18:13 Ritchie's Corruption Connection
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009
Oberstar's Clout Questioned
Back in early September, I wrote about Rep. Oberstar talking about how he was returning to DC to cut through the red tape and get PolyMet up and running ASAP. Based on this article , Rep. Oberstar's impact on cutting through the red tape was minimal at best. Here's part of my original post:
It's been in the works for more than four years, but when the environmental review came out last fall, the federal government blasted the report as inadequate.
Oberstar says he wants a thorough review, but it shouldn't take so long.
"The red tape, the slowdown, the lack of full attention by federal and state permitting agencies has dragged this process out much too long," said Oberstar.
Oberstar said the No. 1 issue people talk about in northeastern Minnesota is jobs. And the Polymet mine promises 400 jobs.
"I've heard some concerns, 'Be careful about our environment. We love this land, we don't want our waters to be adversely affected.' And I've assured people that corners will not be cut, there will be no exceptions made, but we have to do this in an expeditious manner," he said.
Rep. Oberstar is right. It's important to cut through the red tape at both the state and federal level so the jobs are created ASAP. Based on this article, it's obvious that Rep. Oberstar didn't have alot of impact:
Federal agencies signaled this week that it will be nearly another year before they release a revised environmental review on the proposed PolyMet copper mine project.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S. Forest Service says the supplemental environmental impact statement will be ready in summer 2011, then open to public review before a final EIS is issued sometime in 2012.
The company then would need to secure specific mining, emissions, wetlands and construction permits before any mining could begin.
If that's the impact that Rep. Oberstar has as a DC veteran, then his experience and seniority are next to worthless. If a politician with his seniority can't make a meaningful dent in DC's red tape, then what's his value?
Basically, the only thing his seniority is 'good for' is getting a few extra helpings of pork. At a time when people are upset with the fact we're drowning in a sea of red ink, I don' think that's the best selling point.
Rep. Oberstar, in my opinion, has gotten trapped in a perfect storm. His clout is questioned. His opponent is a strong, credible candidate. His strongest selling point is actually a weakness. His loyalty to the range is questioned. Worst of all, he's running against a candidate that's taking away part of his Iron Range base.
This has all the makings of an upset, one that nobody saw coming 6 months ago.
Posted Monday, October 18, 2010 8:31 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 18-Oct-10 01:10 PM
Neither of the two can, Oberstar or your recent Minnesota resident can force through bad policy, nor should either be permitted to demagogue PolyMet prematurely into existence without financial safeguards in place so that if the mine operators poison things there's a sufficient escrow in place to assure a clean-up on their money, not the public's.
Why be long-term irresponsible for a few short-term jobs on the Range? That's simple placing of politics ahead of common sense. Only a fool, or an irresponsible political operative lacking a conscience would do that.
Anything less than forcing a proper and pre-funded escrow is disdainful of the earth and life forms. That kind of mining can be bad stuff - sulfides. Many in the legislature know this. On the DFL side. They will stop any premature or inadequately funded rape of the land for big short term profits with the environmental costs and risks socialized to the state's and nation's citizens instead of being internalized to the venture.
If it cannot pay for itself while being environmentally safe, don't do it.
Mining historically has been rapacious of every opportunity to run cheap and risky, environmentally, and only some kind of fool would allow it again.
Metro DFL legislators distancing themselves from Dayton
While I won't say that the wheels are coming off Sen. Dayton's campaign bus, I'm perfectly willing to say that his campaign bus's engine needs a major tuneup. After the Strib endorsed Tom Horner, many thought things couldn't get worse. This article , I'd argue, hurts Sen. Dayton more than the Strib endorsing Horner. Here's why I've reached that conclusion:
DFL candidate former U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton wants to raise income taxes on upper earners, but you won't hear about it from some DFL legislative candidates.
Some are also promising to vote against the proposed income tax increase if Dayton is elected governor.
"I don't talk about that," said DFL state Sen. Terri Bonoff of Minnetonka, who spent a recent afternoon knocking on doors in in Plymouth, a mostly Republican area of her suburban district.
Bonoff is a moderate Democrat, and she said her re-election bid depends on the support of independents and some Republicans.
In her conversations with voters, Bonoff stresses the need for broader tax code changes, including the sales tax expansion proposed by Independence Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner.
That a north metro DFL legislator like Sen. Bonoff is distancing herself from Dayton's tax proposals speaks volumes about the unpopularity of Sen. Dayton's tax plan.
If Sen. Dayton's plan was popular with metro voters, Sen. Bonoff would be highlighting her support for his plan. That she isn't says everything.
Sen. Bonoff isn't the only one distancing herself from Dayton's plan:
The concern is similar in the east metro suburbs. Sen. Kathy Saltzman, DFL-Woodbury, who's locked in a tough re-election fight, also stresses her independence on tax issues. She's voted against previous attempts to raise income taxes on upper earners.
Saltzman hasn't endorsed a candidate for governor, but she's met with Dayton and Horner. Saltzman said she asked Dayton to be open to other tax ideas, not just taxing the rich.
"I believe that it's not about targeting one group or one group of services," she said. "We really should be looking at an overall tax reform policy. That would be the most responsible way to approach this."
That Sen. Saltzman has talked with Horner says that DFL elected leaders are, at minimum, tepid in their support for Sen. Dayton. That she's voted against "previous attempts to raise income taxes on upper earners" tells Minnesotans that Dayton's tax increases are all but dead in the water.
Republicans will gain seats in the Senate. How many, I don't know but they'll pick up seats. With key DFL state senators already expressing doubt or outright resistance to Dayton's plan, the uphill fight becomes that much more difficult.
Listen to Rep. Winkler's last sentence. Virtually all DFL candidates and legislators want to raise taxes in a 'fair' way. How many Minnesotans think their taxes should be increased in a fair or unfair way? I'm betting that's a small percentage of voters.
In Golden Valley, DFL state Rep. Ryan Winkler is also avoiding the "tax the rich" message in his re-election campaign, but he isn't ruling it out either as part of a budget solution.
Winkler said he agrees with Dayton on the need to raise more tax revenue to fund education and other critical programs.
"I might not agree with him in all details about where all the revenue should come from. I think more of a mixed approach is probably more likely and better," he said. "But those are just differences in detail. I think the overall goal of raising revenue fairly to fund important program is shared by virtually all Democrats. "
I'd also argue with Rep. Winkler that raising taxes isn't just a matter of details. It's messing with people's lives at a time when they're hurting. To say that people will be fine after taxes get raised is delusional. With people hurting, possibly on the verge of unemployment or on the verge of having their house foreclosed on, getting their taxes raised isn't just a trivial detail.
In fact, the KSTP poll essentially says that voters who favor tax increases favor raising other people's taxes, not their own. It'd be one thing if they said 'fine, raise my taxes to fix things.' It's another thing entirely when they say raise the other guy's taxes.
The clear message is that the DFL is totally wedded to raising taxes because they're committed to feeding the government beast.
Sen. Dayton can't afford more defections from his tax-the-rich scheme. For that matter, he can't afford for more DFL legislators to be ambivalent towards his candidacy.
FWIW, this dispels Ember Reichgott-Junge's statement on @Issue where she said that people are coming home to Dayton and that they'll elect him because they trust him.
Apparently, Sen. Bonoff and Sen. Saltzman didn't get that memo.
Posted Monday, October 18, 2010 2:53 PM
Comment 1 by M. Groetken at 18-Oct-10 09:33 PM
In my experience as a Terri Bonoff constituent, you cannot trust what she is saying right now this close to the elections. She made a very distinctive and obvious right shift in what she was saying after Jan. 1st, 2010 knowing that she would be running for re-election.
One of her favorite phrases that I have heard many times at her Town Hall meetings is: "We just have to find new revenue sources." She has very little time for people at those meetings who want to discuss cutting some things in the budget.
If you check her web site where she printed her Session Recap letter in May, you will find this statement: "This year the process was complicated by the upcoming elction season. each of us being on the ballot this fall shaped how we riewed things and how we voted."
At the end of the letter she promised that if she was priviledged to be re-elected, she would work hard to reverse that situation.
From my perspective, Sen. Bonoff will do what she always says she likes to do -- "find new revenue sources" (i.e. vote to raise taxes!).
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Oct-10 10:02 PM
I'm shocked, SHOCKED that a DFL politician would speak with forked tongue. NOT
Comment 2 by M. Groetken at 19-Oct-10 04:53 PM
Gary,
Can you get my email address off of here? You said it was required but would not be published. It appears it is being posted and I cannot remove it myself. Thanks. M.Groetken
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 19-Oct-10 05:43 PM
M. I've done nothing to publish your email address.
Comment 3 by eric z at 20-Oct-10 01:55 PM
Written before the Ciresi move.
Interesting, Gary.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Oct-10 02:00 PM
Eric, I didn't know that Ciresi would be endorsing Horner but this must hurt Dayton. The biggest question I have is whether Dayton's support is strong or weak. I'm betting he's got a nice base of people who won't change their vote, which means trouble for Horner & Dayton. We'll know 13 days from now.
A.J. Kern For Sauk Rapids-Rice School Board
I spent a healthy chunk of this morning talking with A.J. Kern about why she's running for the Sauk Rapids-Rice school board. About fifteen minutes into the interview, it was apparent to me that I was speaking to the best advocate students and parents hope to elect to the SRR school board.
The biggest concern A.J. expressed to me was how SRR was underperforming in the areas of math and science. She also spoke of how the school board meetings included time for parents to speak but that it didn't seem like their opinions were seriously considered.
When I asked if it felt like the parents' input was done out of obligation to check that box off or if it was meant as a way of informing the school board about the parents' concerns, she immediately said that it felt much more like they were going through the motions.
As a result of the school board's inattention to their input, many parents stopped coming. The other observation A.J. made was that the school board members didn't seem pleased that citizens were speaking up, especially against the math curriculum. A.J. said that some parents commenting were met with icy stares.
That's just plain wrong. They work for us. PERIOD.
The other thing that A.J. said is that alot one school board member who is now retiring was questioned about the math curriculum, essentially asking the board member what made this curriculum the right curriculum. The school board member's response was "I'm not a mathematics expert."
When I heard that, my mind flashed back to the 2008 candidate debates when Rob Jacobs told the Transportation Alliance Forum that he wasn't a transportation export so he wouldn't pretend to be one. If a retiring school board member doesn't know much about mathematics, what is that person's qualifications? What business do they have on the board? They're setting policy without knowing subject or curricula material?
I asked A.J. what this board member, and other like-minded board members, were basing their votes on if not on the merits of the curricula. A.J. said that many of the board members were swayed by unions because they're part of these school board members' GOTV operations.
Simply put, we need a dozen A.J. Kerns on the various Greater St. Cloud school boards. We need 'kids activists' who care about the educational product, not just people who check off the boxes.
The bottom line is this: student performance in math and science isn't improving from a very low rating. That's unacceptable, especially since it's being caused by not offering rigorous classes that challenge students.
That's the school board's direct responsibility. If they don't change away from what isn't working, then it's time for parents in Sauk Rapids and Rice to fire the incompetents and hire candidates committed to improving educational outcomes.
That's why I'm endorsing A.J. Kern. We can't get enough A.J. Kern types.
Posted Monday, October 18, 2010 8:11 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 18-Oct-10 08:44 PM
Is she one wanting to teach creationism? One of the Quist - Edwatch crowd?
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Oct-10 10:01 PM
NOPE! A.J. just cares passionately about having the school board be accountable to the people who elected them. This woman is the real deal!!! Think of her as the Sauk Rapids version of Michelle Rhee.
Critz Afflicted With Daschle-itis
Salena Zito's latest column is, as always, informative and revealing. That isn't a good thing for Rep. Mark Critz. Here's what Rep. Critz should be most worried about:
Since taking office five months ago, Critz has cast 280 votes, 265 of them, or 94.6 percent, in line with the majority Democrats' position. Yet, typically, Critz backs away from that association when in his district.
He declares in his latest television ad, for example: "I'm pro-life, pro-gun, and I'll always be an independent voice in Congress.
If anyone thinks that there's such a thing as a pro-life Democrat, they're exceptionally well-hidden.
Beyond that, Rep. Critz's statement that he'll "always be an independent voice in Congress" after voting with Speaker Pelosi 95 percent of the time laughable.
At the time of the special session, pundits highlighted Critz's campaign as the model for how Democrats could win their races. They said, essentially, that running as a Republican would help them win. The bad news for Rep. Critz and Democrats with similar voting records is that their claims of being a moderate disappear when they vote with Speaker Pelosi 95 percent of the time.
This is the earliest onset of Daschle-itis I've ever seen. The dominant trait of Daschle-itis is that you act like the ultimate conservative when you're home in the district and vote like a wild-eyed liberal when you're in the House Chamber.
This affliction was first detected in 2003-4 when Tom Daschle tried portraying himself as President Bush's best friend when in South Dakota, then stabbing him in the back the minute he returned to DC.
It used to take a trained eye to detect this affliction but, these days, the newest newbie or the rankest rube can detect it without difficulty.
I'd almost feel sorry for Rep. Critz if the damage wasn't self-inflicted.
Posted Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:44 AM
Comment 1 by Gretchen Leisen at 19-Oct-10 01:21 PM
I was puzzled by this blog, as I did not know who Mike Critz was, and it was not identified in the article. However, I did a search and now realize Mike is a US Rep from SW Pennsylvania, and he is the man who fills the seat of the late Rep. John Murtha.
With that knowledge in mind, I thank you for pointing out the hypocricy of Democrats who vote the liberal line in Washington DC, and then go back home and act as if they are representing the values of their district. I also hope that Critz's constituents are not fooled by him. The example of Bart Stupak in Michigan House District 1 - who voted for the Obamacare bill while leading a well-publicized campaign with several other so-called Blue Dog Democrats to demand a pro-life plank in the bill is classic. Stupak was an experienced congressman, and should have understood that the Pelosi-led Democrats would pull the rug out from under him after he caved in and supported a bill that was: not read by anyone due to it's overwhelming length; and signed into law by the most pro-abortion President in history (not an exageration).
Many of my pro-life friends have also come to realize that there is really no such thing as a pro-life Democrat politician. Notice that I added "politician" to the statement. I am fully aware that there are cradle-born Democrats who really are pro-life. I really hate to see them continually voting for pro-abortion Democrats simply because they see the "D" after their names. They are being sujjected to a well-orchestrated, deliberate fraud by the liberals/socialists among us.
Comment 2 by eric z at 20-Oct-10 05:02 PM
Gretchen's right - Gary. You jump in the deep end of the pool without first saying what the water looks like. From your link I got the Pittsburgh tie-in, but sometimes you can get cryptic thinking readers are as on top of names and fame as you are. Not always so. Be more gentle with us in your lead paragraph, defining the starting lineups for the teams, which ballpark, etc.
It seems that with just a couple of weeks left, the forces are hunkering in and shifting to phone bank and GOTV hyper-effort.
Except Horner and a parade of beauty-queen endorsements. Ciresi no less. I still see the count after election day showing Horner having 8% and Dayton and Emmer being very close for a plurality race. Neither a Dayton person nor an Emmer person should assume any result is assured. GOTV each side is what might be the end decisive thing.
What do you say of this from the Horner camp:
http://mankatofreepress.com/local/x1637969061/Campaign-notebook-Horner-says-Emmer-s-support-has-peaked
Wishful thinking? Saying it's so is like Peter Pan; "I can fly, I can fly, I can fly?"
If Horner gets 18% instead of 8%, to me that would be unexpected news.
Chip vs. Oberstar Debate Coverage
8:01-- introductions starting...panelists making opening statements...lots of loud applause.
8:07-- Loud, enthusiastic applause for Chip, loud manufactured applause for Oberstar.
8:08-- Oberstar on taxes: high taxes worked during Clinton years...cut taxes failed during Bush years...looking to the past alot.
8:13-- Chip: we were told unemployment wouldn't 8 percent...it's almost 10 percent...We're NOT creating jobs.
8:16-- Oberstar: we cut taxes for the middle class...loud booing...talking points answers
8:17-- Chip: Let's go back...the stimulus was supposed to create jobs...it didn't
8:20-- Oberstar (slouched over): stimulus helped re-open mines
8:22-- Chip: every job gov't creates takes a private sector job away.
8:23-- Chip trying to talk about health care alternatives...hecklers trying to silence him.
8:25-- OBerstar: because of Obamacare, insurance can't drop you over PEC...he then talks about how it'll reduce the defict. NOT TRUE
8:30-- Oberstar plays the class warfare card...THIS EARLY in the debate??? what's he worried about???
8:37-- Oberstar asked what he's done "to fast track mining" re: PolyMet...he launches into a laundry list of excuses, mostly involving red tape.
8:38-- Question about ACCWA & Cap and Trade: Chip: if you increase electrical costs 40-50 percent, companies will import steel
8:42-- Oberstar: blame C & T on Bush 41.
8:55-- Q from audience: Rep. Oberstar, why did you vote for Wall Street bill? Oberstar: it increases accountability
8:57-- Chip: Congress left town without address a $2.9 trillion tax increase.
9:00-- Oberstar: Republican congress filibustered the tax bill. We'll deal with it when we return...That's total nonsense...there wasn't a bill to filibuster.
9:07-- Chip: we need to cut spending...we don't need top-down policy...we need bottom-up policies...huge applause
9:09-- Chip: I'll work with anybody on any issue.
9:17-- Q for Chip: if elected, what will be your highest priority: Chip: Eliminating Obamacare
9:19-- Oberstar defends Obamacare...heckler from crowd: if it's so good, why don't you use it???
Posted Tuesday, October 19, 2010 3:31 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 20-Oct-10 04:48 PM
Live blogging is not an easy thing to do. You, Gary, deserve credit for taking the time and making the effort. Both ends of the spectrum should unite over live-blogging effort being praiseworthy and helpful.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Oct-10 05:02 PM
Thanks Eric. It isn't the easiest thing in the world to do.
For those who are grateful for this first source reporting, feel free to drop some change in my tip jar (cleverly disguised with the name DONATE) for the hard work involved.
Chip vs. Oberstar: A Recap
Several things came through loud and clear during the Chip Cravaack-Jim Oberstar debate that should impact the race these last 14 days of the campaign.
To me, one of the biggest things to come out of the debate was Rep. Oberstar's being clearly annoyed. He didn't like it when Chip's supporters expressed their disagreement with him. He didn't like it when Chip took him to task on PolyMet, Obamacare and Cap and Trade.
Rep. Oberstar was evasive a good portion of the time. A perfect example was Rep. Oberstar's answer when asked what he'd done "to fast track the opening of the PolyMet Mine." After giving a long, incoherent, evasive answer, he'd said nothing pertaining to the question. This prompted a number of us to tweet (I'm paraphrasing here): "I've done nothing" to get PolyMet fast tracked.
When asked about the effect Cap and Tax will have on mining, Rep. Oberstar said that mining is exempted in the bill. HINT TO REP. OBERSTAR: Power plants supplying the electricity to the mines aren't exempt. That's why electricity costs will jump 40-50 percent if Cap and Trade becomes law.
Rep. Oberstar's answer on mining being exempt from Cap and Trade might be the most intellectually dishonest answer I've heard at a debate.
That said, the Cap and Trade answer has competition. Chip jumped on the fact that "Congress left Washington without dealing with the $2.9 trillion tax increase" heading our direction. Rep. Oberstar reflexively replied that evil Republicans had filibustered the bill, thus thwarting the Democrats' best efforts.
That's utter nonsense. There wasn't a bill to be filibustered. That's before considering the fact that 40+ House Democrats announced that they wouldn't vote for the Democrats' bill that didn't extend the highest tax bracket cuts.
Rep. Oberstar had an uphill fight on another issue, namely the stimulus bill. He clearly tried portraying it as a positive, citing construction jobs, etc. Chip's reply was straightforward and concise: The stimulus was supposed to create jobs. It didn't. We've lost 3,000,000 since it was signed into law.
I knew there was something that was bothering me about Rep. Oberstar's behavior but I couldn't think what it was. It took awhile for me to figure out what it was but I finally remembered. Oberstar had the same scowl and the same dismissive attitude that Vice President Mondale had when he debated Norm Coleman in 2002.
Rep. Oberstar insisted that the stimulus had created jobs. Chip's response was concise: For every government job the stimulus creates, a private sector won't be created.
The worst case scenario happened to Rep. Oberstar today. Chip Cravaack was sharp and to the point. He was poised and seemingly unflappable. Most importantly, he had better command of the issues than Rep. Oberstar. He looked the part of a congressman.
Meanwhile, Rep. Oberstar got stuck arguing the case that the stimulus worked, that Obamacare will reduce the deficit and that mining companies have been exempted from Cap and Trade.
Worst of all, he looked like a total scold towards people who disagreed with him, pointing his finger at them repeatedly.
Consider this the turning point for the public where they turn against Rep. Oberstar.
UPDATE: I just finished a blogger conference call with Chip. He's ecstatic with his perfomance, which is well-justified.
Because the audio to the livestream was garbled much of the time, in part I suspect because the DECC has terrible accoustics, I didn't hear about Rep. Oberstar's antics. At one point, the audience booed his answer (on what, I don't know because I couldn't hear Oberstar's response). In reaction to the booing, Rep. Oberstar pointed his finger at the crowd and called them "part of the flat earth crowd."
Rep. Oberstar is clearly upset that he's being challenged. In my opinion, he thinks that seat should be his forever. Sorry, Rep. Oberstar but constitutional republics don't work that way. Only kingdoms do. We're a constitutional republic, not a kingdom with a royal lineage.
Posted Tuesday, October 19, 2010 5:41 PM
Comment 1 by Saundra Little at 19-Oct-10 05:48 PM
My favorite part of the forum was at the very start of it when Chip Cravaack went to shake Oberstar's hand and Oberstar completely ignored him! Can we say total disrespect!!
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 19-Oct-10 05:56 PM
Seriously??? I didn't see that. Yes, that's total disrespect. It's obvious that Rep. Oberstar thinks of himself more as part of a royal lineage than as a public servant.
Comment 2 by MplsSteve at 20-Oct-10 03:33 AM
I think it's safe to say that you can tell a lot about a person by the way they behave under pressure or criticism.
Oberstar has clearly shown himself for who he really is - a thin-skinned fraud.
OTOH, I do recall having met a few Republicans over the years who acted somewhat like Oberstar when they too were questioned about votes they made.
Cravaack, Sutton Call Out Oberstar
Hooray to Chip Cravaack for calling out Jim Oberstar's bad behavior:
DULUTH -- At a debate today, 18-term incumbent Congressman Jim Oberstar boastfully defended his record of wasteful run-away spending which has caused our nation's debt to skyrocket. Conversely, Chip Cravaack laid out his vision for a better Minnesota and more prosperous America. In front of an energized crowd of more than 1,800 at the Duluth Entertainment and Convention Center, Cravaack explained his plan to create jobs, stop tax hikes, and eliminate pork-barrel spending in Washington.
"It's disappointing that Congressman Oberstar once again showed how out of touch he is with Minnesotans in the eighth district," said Cravaack, a 24-year Navy veteran. "His behavior today is what's wrong with Washington and why Minnesotans believe Congressman Oberstar has lost his way."
Throughout the debate, Congressman Oberstar repeatedly scolded those in attendance. In fact, he shouted to audience members who disagreed with him and arrogantly called them "members of the Flat Earth Society." When asked about the stimulus, Congressman Oberstar repeatedly said "the federal government creates jobs." When asked about ObamaCare, he angrily pointed at the audience claiming their health care is better after this law. When asked about his steadfast support for the cap-and-trade national energy tax and America's Commitment to Clean Water Act, Congressman Oberstar replied: "If you want clean water, join the Supreme Court."
During the spirited debate, Cravaack explained to a standing ovation that the federal government does not create jobs, the private sector does. Regarding ObamaCare, Cravaack said repealing this fatally-flawed law would be one of his top priorities in Congress. And Cravaack assured the audience he would oppose the job-killing cap-and-trade national energy tax.
When asked about his vote in September to adjourn for the year ; which failed to allow a vote to stop a massive $3.9 trillion job-killing tax increase on all Americans on Jan. 1, 2011 ; Congressman Oberstar erroneously denied it.
"Congressional Republicans and more than 30 House Democrats were calling for a vote to extend the tax cuts for working families and small businesses yet Congressman Oberstar voted to adjourn, which left the $3.9 trillion tax increase on the table," Cravaack said. "The tax hikes Congressman Oberstar voted for would adversely impact 75 percent of small business owners that file taxes and individual rates ; the same small business owners responsible for nearly two-thirds of private sector job creation."
Cravaack looks forward to debating Congressman Oberstar again on Friday, Oct. 22 at 7:00 p.m. at Itasca Community College in Grand Rapids.
For weeks, Congressman Oberstar refused to confirm to participate in Tuesday's debate in Duluth. But after the Duluth News Tribune published an editorial highlighting his refusal to explain his record to voters, the 18-term Congressman reneged and participated in the debate. His decision preceded a poll that showed Cravaack within 3 points of Oberstar, a strong position for a challenger going into the final stretch of the race. The poll was conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, a national firm who polls for the Wall Street Journal and NBC News.
Cravaack is a graduate of the United States Naval Academy and served in the U.S. Navy and Naval Reserve for 24 years during which he served at the Pentagon and NATO. After retiring from the Navy, he flew commercially for Northwest Airlines and served as a union representative for the Air Line Pilots Association. Cravaack lives with his wife and two young sons in Lindstrom and was president of the local Parent Teacher Organization.
It's insulting that Rep. Oberstar would call his constituents members of the "Flat Earth Society." It's just indicative of how much he feels he's entitled to that congressional seat, almost like it's his by royal lineage, not via election.
Minnesota Republican Party Chairman chimed in with this statement:
"Jim Oberstar has been in Washington, D.C. for way too long and his patronizing performance in today's debate reinforces why it's time for a change. While Oberstar tried to defend his support for record deficits and out of control government spending, Chip Cravaack outlined his optimistic agenda of job creation and reform. When he wasn't attacking members of the audience, Oberstar demonstrated time and again that he just doesn't get it. On November 2, it's time to send Oberstar packing and replace him with a real leader like Chip Cravaack."
Jim Oberstar can't be considered a public servant by any definition. In his mind, he's royalty.
Posted Tuesday, October 19, 2010 7:18 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 20-Oct-10 04:46 PM
All sound and fury signifying nothing. Two weeks from now we will have a better idea than this speculation and such going on now.
Oberstar's Coordination Dilemma
If this Politico article is accurate, which I think it is, then Jim Oberstar has more difficulties than just Chip Cravaack. Granted, Chip is a formidable difficulty that got more formidable this morning. Here's another thing that Rep. Oberstar should be worrying about:
Oberstar's aides say he's doing everything he needs to do to make sure there's not a Rep. Cravaack in January 2011.
They count 1,006 volunteers in eight offices, which they contend more accurately reflects Oberstar's support in his northern Minnesota district. John Schadl, a Oberstar spokesman, said in an email that the congressman has a "great deal of local support." and it will be "felt on election day when over 500 people hit the streets in a final get out the vote push."
"They are taking lawn signs, putting up lawn signs, making voter-contact calls, door-knocking, distributing campaign [literature]," Schadl told POLITICO in an e-mail. Moreover, Schadl, says, there are another 527 waiting in the wings to help out in the final run-up to the election.
Schadl shouldn't know about what a 527 group is doing. That's called coordination and it's illegal. I know because I remember having a lengthy conversation after the 2004 election where we talked about the superiority of the Bush-Cheney GOTV operation. The final conclusion was that, since it was all done inside the Bush-Cheney campaign, we didn't have coordination difficulties. Bush-Cheney 04 controlled the entire process for their campaign.
On more than a few occasions, we talked with people who complained about all the visits from 527's, unions, the DNC and, last but not least, the KEdwards campaign. Some homes were hit 3-4 times a week, each time by a different group. Had they been allowed to coordinate, they could've covered a ton more ground.
That's the problem. They couldn't coordinate, at least legally.
I'm not sure legal considerations are a top priority with the Oberstar campaign. I'm not accusing them of willfully breaking the law but I can't rule it out, either.
The Oberstar campaign has been, at best, dysfunctional. They haven't had to run a serious campaign in a decade or more. When they noticed that their opponent was someone to be taken seriously, I'm sure that they had to scramble to put an organization together.
What's probably hampering them the most is that Oberstar's vote for Cap and Trade has driven many of the steelworkers union guys into the Cravaack camp, where they're helping Chip's GOTV operation.
It's in plain sight that Oberstar is in serious trouble, evidenced by his condescending debate performance. It appears that he's coordinating his GOTV operation with a 527, which is forbidden.
In short, it doesn't look like Oberstar is doing much of anything right.
Posted Wednesday, October 20, 2010 5:03 PM
Comment 1 by Larry at 20-Oct-10 04:57 AM
How does one go about filing a complaint against Oberstar for improper coordination and where does one file the complaint?
Comment 2 by blueJ at 20-Oct-10 04:04 PM
It looks like Mr. Schadl was speaking of "another 527" volunteers "waiting in the wings..." It would be a coincidence that the number 527 is also associated with the term for outside groups.
Comment 3 by eric z at 20-Oct-10 04:41 PM
Oberstar's coordinated. He's not fallen off his bicycle, to my knowledge. So what's the complaint?
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Oct-10 05:00 PM
It's illegal under campaign finance law for a candidate to coordinate with a 527 organization or with other entities. In fact, a candidate can't even coordinate with campaign committees. For instance, real life experience, the HRCC, the House Republican Campaign Committee for the state legislature, is running ads touting King Banaian. At the end of the ad is the disclaimer saying that it's being paid for by the HRCC, not the candidate. By law, it would've been against the law for King to call up the HRCC & ask them to run that ad.
To be clear, the HRCC made this ad buy without King's knowledge. Admittedly, though, King is more than happy to accept the help.
It's illegal for Oberstar to have any information on what this 527 is doing or planning on doing.
Ritchie's Corruption Connection
It's no secret that Mark Ritchie is a fan of the vouching system even though he won't address the issue on his campaign website . Minnesotans should write that provision out of existence. Powerline's Scott Johnson wrote about the potential for corruption through the vouching system in this post :
Minnesota is one of the few states that allows same-day voter registration and has become infamous for its lax same day voter registration requirements. Under Minnesota's registration law, an eligible but previously unregistered individual may register to vote in his precinct by showing proof of residence in the precinct or, in the absence of such proof, having a voter registered in the precinct vouch under oath that he personally knows that the unregistered individual is a resident of the precinct. Although the requirements necessary to establish residence are minimal, they are not non-existent and they are the statutory protection against vote fraud and serial voting.
If the potential for voter fraud is that simple, then we need to eliminate that possibility ASAP. As Scott explains, it isn't just about the potential for fraud. It's that there's been an attempt to commit voter fraud through the vouching system:
Among the well-funded and supposedly independent groups supporting John Kerry in the campaign is Americans Coming Together (ACT). ACT has taken notice of Minnesota's special vulnerabilty to vote fraud and organized a sophisticated effort to exploit it in a manner that violates Minnesota law. In Minnesota the Bush campaign has come into the possession of the following email from ACT to its Minnesota volunteers:
Election Day is upon us. You are confirmed to volunteer with ACT (America Coming Together - http://www.actforvictory.org/) on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov 2.
We will be creating name badges that include your Ward and Precinct information for each of the thousands of volunteers that day to make it easier to find a volunteer to vouch for a voter at the polls.
I am emailing you to request your street address, city and zipcode. We've already got your other contact information, but your record in our database does not include this information.
You can save us time on election day by replying today to this email with this information, or give us a call at [phone number with St. Paul area code].
In order to get your badge correct, please reply by Thursday.
Thank you for your help and cooperation. See you on Election Day.
ACT actually put a system together that connected registered voters in Minnesota with 'volunteers'. Their system was certainly straightforward. Their communications certainly laid out how the voucher-volunteer connections would be made.
That email is undeniably a smoking gun.
What's more is that there's another connection that isn't well known, the connection between Mark Ritchie and ACT. This article does a great job of connecting those dots:
A profoundly straightforward and potentially effective pro-voting campaign called November 2 has just been launched by National Voice, a coalition of nonprofit and community groups working to maximize public participation in the democratic process. The campaign, developed by the crack advertising firm of Wieden and Kennedy (famed for its work for Nike), is clever in its simplicity. It's all about branding November 2 on T-shirts, billboards, computer screens and bumper stickers and connecting it to the logos of numerous organizations people trust. November 2 on the front of the T-shirt and National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Sierra Club, League of Women Voters or Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) on the back. As Billy Bragg sang satirically: "The revolution is just a T-shirt away."
There has been substantial media coverage about large groups working on the partisan side in the election, receiving millions of dollars from big donors such as George Soros and Peter Lewis. America Coming Together (ACT), as a Section 527 organization in the IRS tax code, is allowed to do partisan voter registration as long as it isn't coordinated or specifically supportive of a specific candidate. ACT, which has raised more than $50 million, is about identifying potential voters who have a good chance of getting to the polls. Steve Rosenthal, the former political director of the AFL-CIO, says ACT "will make in the range of 10 million voter contacts before the election, but they will only be registering perhaps 500,000 new voters," because the less dependable "nonvoter" is not their priority.
In other words, ACT was involved in a massive, nationwide voter registration drive. That's just part of the operation. The work done registering voters would be wasted if they didn't vote. That's where Mark Ritchie gets involved:
Only a year old, National Voice hired gifted organizer Mark Ritchie, a veteran of international organizing on issues of global trade and justice. "I see November 2 as an outreach tool to drive people to the Web site where we can get them involved as a volunteer. I see the effort as unifying a theme and message that can tie together disparate GOTV efforts. Thirty thousand T-shirts are out the door, and bumper stickers and iron-ons. In essence, we are working to make it cool to vote and cool to get involved beyond just voting." There has been a bus tour with a film crew that is gathering footage for public service announcements on television. "If you saw the Nike commercial during the NBA finals--that fabulous one with Lance Armstrong riding his bike and the fantastic views and warmth," said Ritchie, smiling, "well, the same guy who did that one is doing our commercials."
They're talking about the T-shirts mentioned earlier in this post. The November 2nd Project T-shirts had their 'sponsors' names on the back. These sponsors included the NAACP, the Sierra Club and ACORN.
What this means is that ACORN and ACT were working as part of a big coalition to register voters and the November 2nd Project, run by Mark Ritchie, was 'harvesting' the votes with his GOTV operation.
I can't prove that Mark Ritchie knew about this specific email from ACT to its volunteers but I'm confident that he was sympathetic to the vouching system. Personally, I'd find it difficult to believe that he didn't know that ACT and ACORN weren't corrupt.
The November 2nd Project's mission was to get the voters that ACT and ACORN registered to their polling places. They admitted that they were coordinating with ACORN and ACT, which means that the November 2nd Project was given the names and addresses of the people ACORN and ACT registered.
The November 2nd Project couldn't help but notice the flawed voter registrations. They'd have to be blind to not notice. Check out this information on what ACT was involved with:
ACT Submitted Faulty Registrations In St. Louis.
"Sleuths at the St. Louis County Board of Election Commissioners are trashing hundreds of faulty voter registrations, most of them collected by voter drive groups like Pro-Vote and America Coming Together. KMOV presented [Commissioner David] Welch with a list of names of voters who apparently registered twice, using variations of their names , registrations that had not yet been flagged." (KMOV Website, http://www.kmov.com/topstories/stories/100604ccktKMOVVote.7e36f2b.html, Accessed 10/7/04)
It's worth noting the article's date as it was written almost a month before the election. Ritchie certainly had to know about ACT's corruption if it was in the news.
Why has Mark Ritchie stayed silent all this time? Why hasn't he spoken out about ACT's corruption? After all of ACT's and ACORN's proven corruption, you'd think that he'd reject ACORN's endorsement. Instead of hearing him reject their endorsement, all that's been heard from Mr. Ritchie is the sounds of crickets.
It's insulting that Mr. Ritchie insists that voter fraud doesn't exist and has never existed when he worked with corrupt organizations in 2004 as part of a major progressive GOTV coalition.
Perhaps that explains this heated exchange between Mr. Ritchie and Rep. Dan Severson:
"What I hear senior citizens say to me is look, I've voted since Roosevelt. I've never taken a bit of charity or anything from the government," Ritchie said. "I am not going to start becoming a ward of the state just because you want to deny me the right to vote because I'm so old now I don't have to drive and I don't carry government-issued identification."
Ritchie also said a photo ID law would negatively impact thousands of military and overseas voters. But Severson called that a bogus argument.
"It's just absolutely wrong, because they have military ID, which are government-sponsored IDS, or they have a passport, which again are government sponsored," Severson said. "There's no reason, and if Secretary Ritchie lacks the creativity and ingenuity to make that happen, the he shouldn't be secretary of state. We need someone who's going to go after this issue and validate the valid votes."
What BS. I'm betting that Mr. Ritchie has never talked with a senior citizen who said that politicians wanted to "deny him the right to vote..." I'm betting that that's his attempt to sound melodramatic.
Rep. Severson's rebuttal that the military have their own ID's shoots down Ritchie's other argument.
QUESTION: Why is Mark Ritchie opposed to a system that will actually speed up the voting process?
Mark Ritchie's work with ACT and ACORN, two exceptionally corrupt organizations, during a voter registration drive and GOTV operation certainly calls into question Mr. Ritchie's decisionmaking and his integrity.
How can we trust someone who's stayed silent all these years when he had the opportunity to admit that these organizations are/were corrupt? I won't trust him with our electtion system.
A vote is a terrible thing to have compromised.
Originally posted Wednesday, October 20, 2010, revised 23-Jul 10:51 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 20-Oct-10 11:37 PM
If it had not been for his honest and courageously competent handling of the recount, Coleman would have stolen Franken's victory.
Ritchie is a good guy. Can you imagine if Kiffmeyer had been SoS for the recount.
Three Stooges and Buster Keaton rolled into one, Harold Lloyd thrown in for good measure.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 21-Oct-10 12:11 AM
Actually, I can imagine it if Mary Kiffmeyer had been SoS. She would've followed up to make sure that election judges knew the rules for absentee ballots. Ritchie didn't bother with that. Three election judges said he didn't. Shame on him for that.
Ritchie also didn't clean up the voter rolls, something required of him by HAVA, which was passed in 2002. ANOTHER CRITICAL FAILURE on Ritchie's part. It let felons vote who hadn't met the requirements laid out in straightforward fashion in Minnesota's election laws.
With Ritchie, it's all about increasing turnout without respect to whether the additional people voting are eligible to vote. That's a corrupting thing because, essentially, Ritchie is deciding unilaterally to ignore Minnesota's election laws by executive fiat. NO CHECKS. NO BALANCES.
Eric, I know you better than that. If a Republican did this, you'd criticize him/her & rightly so. We can't have our elected leaders picking which laws they'll bey & which ones they'll ignore. That's the type of tyranny that's unacceptable wherever it's found. PERIOD.
