September 23-26, 2011
Sep 23 06:42 Dayton's thin skin showing Sep 24 01:55 EXCLUSIVE: Hamm announces DFL primary challenge against Sen. Klobuchar Sep 24 08:25 Unionized day care & streamlined oversight? Sep 24 21:37 Gov. Downgrade strikes again Sep 25 08:17 The Left's Hatred for Scott Walker Sep 25 22:38 Why do I even bother? Sep 26 07:28 Was Rep. Ellison Pushing Social Security privatization?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Dayton's thin skin showing
Gov. Dayton's thin skin shows whenever Republicans challenge his policies or his political allies' wishes. Last night, Republicans held informational hearings on whether Gov. Dayton has the authority to use an executive order to force unionization of day care providers. Last night, Gov. Dayton accused Republicans of grandstanding:
On Thursday night, Republicans held informational hearings on the issue, but Dayton said the forum was nothing but "political grandstanding" meant to whip people into a frenzy.
Gov. Dayton's political allies have been trying to unionize day care providers who work in their own homes for over 6 months. The unions have said that they're getting alot of people signing cards that indicate they want to be unionized. That's nonsense. If they were getting alot of people signing up to be unionized, they wouldn't need to bother Gov. Dayton to sign an executive order.
Republicans fired back at Gov. Dayton:
"[The governor has] already created a situation where people are nervous," said Sen. Mike Parry. "They think there will be more government intervention, and that's what our governor seems to be wanting to do."
If AFSCME would be willing to accept 'Hell no' for an answer, we wouldn't be dealing with this. Day care providers don't want to be unionized and to have dues deducted from their stipend.
Gov. Dayton and his union allies understand that unions were weakened in Wisconsin, then Ohio. They're on a significant losing streak. If they don't win this fight, which they probably won't, they'll be reeling heading into an election year.
If they're rejected again, which is likely, it'll create the image that they aren't politically influential. That means their agenda gets less attention. That means they won't get their phone calls returned.
Dayton's union allies can take being called corrupt but it'll almost kill them to not be called politically influential.
Republicans were right to ignore Gov. Dayton's complaining. Day care providers were worried that AFSCME and SEIU would attempt to run roughshod over them. Last night's hearings were effectively a shot across AFSCME's and SEIU's bow.
Posted Friday, September 23, 2011 6:42 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 23-Sep-11 03:18 PM
And the GOP is incapable of, or above 'political grandstanding' meant to whip people into a frenzy?
I suppose pigs would fly before the Republican party ever did any such thing.
Now, the IP, I could see them not doing it because few would notice if they did.
But Republicans, the party of Michele Bachmann, well ...
EXCLUSIVE: Hamm announces DFL primary challenge against Sen. Klobuchar
In an exclusive to this reporter, W.B. Bill Hamm is announcing his candidacy to be the DFL candidate for the U.S. Senate in 2012. Here's his press release:
Candidacy Announced
By W. D. (Bill) Hamm
September 24th, 2011
Today, I am announcing my candidacy for the DFL primary election on August 14, 2012 for U.S. Senator from Minnesota. This action is being taken for the following reasons:
1. Senator Klobuchar's 8-year stance against freedom and the Second Amendment. Her antigun position, as identified by her ZERO NRA rating and her expected support for the UN small arms treaty, disproportionately affects people of color and rural Americans, a very un-American position.
2. Senator Klobuchar's 8-year aggression against freedom by means of her continued support of the racist and economically biased 'War on Drugs'. She supported this same policy as a persecutor of these groups while working as a public prosecutor prior to her election. Her commitment to this racist and culturally biased program (started knowingly by Richard Nixon) is inexcusable.
3. Senator Klobuchar's 8-year support of the racist and economically biased addiction of our children to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) drugs. This predominantly male diagnosis is being made at rates seen nowhere else in the world. Because up to 8% of these male children addicted to ADHD drugs before puberty will be made sterile and that more than twice as many poverty level children are being addicted, one could consider her a champion of the New Eugenics.
4. Senator Klobuchar's 6-year support for continued Federal influence in the states' rights issue of educating our children has undisputedly lead to the most racially and economically biased education system Minnesota and the nation have seen since the days of the Jim Crow South.
5. Senator Klobuchar's 8-year failure of leadership in reducing the world's highest addiction rate to the products of big drug companies. Over 47% of America's adult population is now addicted with 90+% of all painkillers made being prescribed here. Drug dependency upon prescription drugs is racially and economically biased in application and scope.
6. Senator Klobuchar's 6-year failure to do anything to stop the Great American obesity epidemic. This rampant problem is racially and economically skewed by the kinds of foods available and affordable to these people. Senator Klobuchar's abject failure to lead on this issue has made her a passive witness to the fattening of America for profit by companies like Monsanto.
7. Senator Klobuchar's 6-year failure to do anything to turn around the unemployment rate of black Americans that runs at more than double that of whites. She is practicing the costly and ineffective welfare state approach of giving them a hand out rather than a hand up. A policy that undermines blacks while keeping middle class union workers employed.
Senator Klobuchar's continued support for the out of touch progressive/socialist leadership of the Minnesota DFL has made it impossible to support her or my party's position on the above issues. This is a party that has forsaken the majority of those who should be its support base to back a collection of unrepresentative elitist minority factions.
For all of these reasons, I am entering the DFL primary race against Senator Klobuchar as a representative of the 62%, (the working class who don't reach the bottom of the middle crust threshold and who are neither rich nor middle class) not the other 38%.
Mr. Hamm sounds like a cross between former Carter pollster Pat Caddell and former Clinton pollster Doug Schoen, with a little Ron Paul thrown in. Like Mssrs. Caddell and Schoen, Hamm sounds like an old-fashioned Hubert Humphrey-style Democrat.
Hamm sounds like a politician who understands and supports blue collar workers . He definitely doesn't represent the elitist wing of the DFL. His point about Second Amendment rights definitely differentiates him from Sen. Klobuchar.
By comparison, Sen. Klobuchar hails from the Twin Cities progressive wing of the DFL. That's the wing that's comfortable aligning themselves with pacifist organizations like United for Peace and Justice and Codepink. That's the wing that enthusiastically accepts campaign contributions from PACs like EMILY's List.
Mr. Hamm won't get a fair shake in the Twin Cities media. If it was up to the Twin Cities' media, people probably wouldn't know that Sen. Klobuchar had a DFL primary opponent until the results were posted on Mark Ritchie's Secretary of State website after the ballots have been counted.
I don't agree with Mr. Hamm on many issues, with Second Amendment being one of the few things where I agree with Mr. Hamm. The biggest reason why I'm publishing this exclusive is because people like Mr. Hamm deserve a fair shake.
Elections should be about ideas and principles, not about the party machinery of either political party. That's why Mr. Hamm's announcement is being published here.
Posted Saturday, September 24, 2011 1:55 AM
No comments.
Was Rep. Ellison Pushing Social Security privatization?
During Friday night's interview with Bill O'Reilly, Rep. Keith Ellison, (DFL-MN), defended President Obama and Obamanomics, saying that "Over time, stocks go up..."
If that's true, isn't Rep. Ellison arguing that a portion of the FICA taxes collected from 20-somethings and 30-somethings should go into a mutual fund to create more wealth for younger workers? If he isn't advocating for that, shouldn't he be?
After all, who's against people getting the best return on investment on their money possible? Shouldn't that be the goal whenever possible?
It's doubtful that Rep. Ellison realized what he'd just said. It's entirely possible that he said that to put the most positive spin possible on Obamanomics. Throughout the interview, Rep. Ellison was tapdancing as as fast as he's ever done outside a courtroom.
The other possibility is that Rep. Ellison didn't mean a thing he said. It might be that he was putting his best spin on the Obama administration's economic disaster. Either way, we're in the midst of the Obama administration's economic disaster.
No amount of spin can change that fact.
Posted Monday, September 26, 2011 7:28 AM
No comments.
Unionized day care & streamlined oversight?
If ever people needed anything to tell them what lengths unions were willing to go to establish day care unions, this quote says it all:
Day care provider Sharon O'Boyle of St. Paul Park said she and other union supporters see want a union in order to have a stronger voice when it comes to streamlining government oversight of day care facilities. O'Boyle also said she wants a stronger voice advocating for higher day care reimbursements from the state.
"I want a union to work with me on issues that concern myself and other licensed family child care providers," she said. Those issues include licensing rules and regulations, and adequate compensation for services to families.
What's interesting to me is that Ms. O'Boyle thinks that the best vehicle for "streamlining government oversight of day care facilities" is AFSCME or SEIU. When have unions streamlined anything?
Additionally, Rep. Mary Franson said that she knew of at least 2 lobbying organizations while she was a day care provider. Does anyone think that unions would be better advocates for these businesses than lobbying organizations would be?
It's apparent that SEIU and AFSCME want these businesses unionized so their political influence doesn't diminish. That's SEIU's and AFSCME's worst nightmare, the thing that worries Eliot Seide and Javier Morillo-Alicea the most.
The political reality is that AFSCME and SEIU wouldn't be better advocates for in-home day care businesses than lobbying groups are. Furthermore, forced unionization of these in-home businesses isn't likely to lower costs to parents. It's likely to cost more.
That matters considering the fact that many of the children receiving day care from these in-home businesses are recipients of state aid. The last thing we need right now is to give AFSCME and SEIU another reason to argue for more of the taxpayers' money.
This is a union power play. It's beyond Gov. Dayton's ability to force unionization of these in-home businesses through an executive order:
What is the status of home-based child care providers under the Public Employment Labor Relations Act (PELRA)?
Answer: Minnesota Statutes Chapter 179A defines a public employer as the state of Minnesota or other local political subdivisions. The law also defines public employees as those appointed or employed by a public employer. Under current law, a self-employed, home-based child care provider would not be a public employer or a public employee. Here is the link to the law; the relevant definitions are in subdivisions 14 and 15: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=179A.03
It's time for AFSCME and SEIU to drop this charade. Contrary to what SEIU and AFSCME say, they didn't find the support they needed to start a day care union. If they had, they wouldn't need Gov. Dayton's executive order. They'd start the unionization drive by filing with the NLRB.
It's telling that they didn't file that notice. In fact, it's all you really need to know about the situation.
Posted Saturday, September 24, 2011 8:25 AM
Comment 1 by Chad Q at 24-Sep-11 01:16 PM
'I want a union to work with me on issues that concern myself and other licensed family child care providers,' she said. Those issues include licensing rules and regulations, and adequate compensation for services to families.
Basically she wants the union to do all the leg work of making sure she is running a legit business and then wants to make lots of money doing it. Typical misguided liberal.
Why exactly is the state subsidizing daycare anyway? If you can't afford to not work, don't have or stop having kids. It is not your right to have kids so others can pay to have them taken care of.
Gov. Downgrade strikes again
Minnesota's credit rating was just downgraded , which will inevitably lead to higher interest rates for bonding projects. In fact, those higher interest rates might in Minnesota sooner rather than later. Here's the details from CNBC:
Minnesota's last remaining perfect AAA credit rating disappeared on Friday when Standard & Poor's downgraded the state's debt, citing lawmakers' weakness for fixing budget shortfalls with accounting shifts and rainy day funds.
The New York-based agency cut its rating on the state's bonds to AA+, joining Fitch Ratings and Moody's Investors Service in giving a less-than-perfect grade to a state long proud of being above average. The downgrade also is likely to lead to higher borrowing costs for the state and local governments including cities and school districts, although the initial increase could be masked by low interest rates. The state is due to sell bonds next week and later this year.
Naturally, the lefties have jumped on this as proof that the GOP legislature should've voted to kill businesses:
Minority Leader Paul Thissen (DFL-Minneapolis) put it well in a press release:
Every day that passes, the consequences of the Republicans' beg, borrow, and steal budget solution become more glaring. Our kids started the school year in debt, with nearly half of their schools asking taxpayers to fill their budget gaps. Now the Republican-forced loans that schools, cities, and counties are seeking will come at a higher cost.
Rep. Thissen shouldn't be heard until the DFL produces a budget with specific legislative language and spreadsheets. Rep. Thissen and Sen. Bakk spent last session whining about the GOP's budget without producing their own budget.
Should these legislators, along with Gov. Dayton, not get blamed for their insistence on spending every penny that taxpayers sent to St. Paul? I don't think so. Of course, Gov. Dayton
Dayton, who gave up on a plan to raise income taxes on the highest earners because of GOP resistance, blamed Republicans for the downgrade.
He called it "very disappointing but not surprising, given the fiscal irresponsibility of the Legislature's Republican majority. Standard and Poor's specifically cited the use of one-time measures, which would not have been necessary had my proposed budget been adopted."
It's convenient that he didn't mention that it was his budget that caused the logjam. Gov. Downgrade's tax increases wouldn't have fixed the problem, either in the short- or long-term. It's time he admitted that. The fix would've been momentary. The tax hike would've been permanent.
What's infuriating is that the DFL, led by Mssrs. Bakk and Thissen and backstopped by Gov. Dayton, opposed the GOP's reforms until the people insisted on them passing.
Let's remember that Gov. Dayton planned on touring the state to pressure Republican legislators into raising taxes during the shutdown. They initially announced that it'd be a 4 day tour of the state. Gov. Dayton's staff pulled the plug after 2 days.
Gov. Downgrade and the DFL hoped to hear a cavalcade of cheers for the DFL's tax-the-rich scheme. Instead, Steve Gottwalt framed things perfectly , which exposed the shutdown tour as a DFL PR stunt. That essentially ended the shutdown.
The reality is that the DFL cared more about paying off their political allies than they cared about being the taxpayers' watchdog or replenishing the state's reserve fund. Had they sought a sound policy from the outset, things would've been substantially different.
Let's remember that Gov. Dayton's initial budget called for $39,000,000,000 in general fund spending for the 2012-13 biennium. That budget called for creating a 10.95% top tax rate plus a 3% surcharge for people making $1,000,000 annually.
With the "Bush tax cuts" extended, the economy experienced a momentary bounce. That triggered a momentary gain of one-time revenue for Minnesota's general fund. Rather than setting that money aside, the DFL's spendaholic legislature and governor insisted that we spend it all.
That's irresponsibility personified.
Isn't it interesting that the DFL is whining that the state didn't spend enough even though this is the biggest general fund budget in state history?
The DFL insisted on spending more, which the people didn't want. The people insisted on spending less. After stripping the DFL's arguments away, that's why we got the budget we got.
Let's understand something about Gov. Downgrade's tax increases. They would've hurt Minnesota's economy. They wouldn't have generated the revenues that Gov. Downgrade predicted. ( Isn't that always the case?)
Gov. Downgrade's tax hikes would've caused some businesses to relocate to another state. Other businesses would've been hurt while other businesses would've cut the cost of doing businesses by laying people off or not giving them raises or by making employees pay for more their insurance premiums.
If the DFL wants to remain relevant over the long-term, they need to stop with their spendaholic,
taxaholic ways. When the DFL was ascendant, they were the party that spent money on a real education system. Now they're the party that funds higher education.
They're the party that spends money on higher education to pay off their political allies. When the DFL was ascendant, they were the party that reveled in being the funders of innovation. What we see now in the DFL's budget is the funding of the stale status quo.
That mindset of complacency led to the bond-rating houses downgrading Minnesota's bond rating. Couple that with Gov. Downgrade's dithering on accepting the will of the people and you've got the formula for downgrading Minnesota's bond rating.
Posted Saturday, September 24, 2011 9:37 PM
No comments.
The Left's Hatred for Scott Walker
It's apparent that the Left won't hesitate in lying about anyone who's willing to upset their failed status quo systems. The Left's attacks on Scott Walker are a perfect example of their willingness to lie if necessary to defeat an opponent. This op-ed offers proof:
Walker is heavily funded by, and answers to, anti-public education privatization policy-pushers like the Koch brothers, the Walton family and Betsy DeVos' ironically named American Federation for Children, at whose annual event Walker was a keynote speaker last spring.
These groups have the admitted goal of privatizing public education and are using Wisconsin as a staging ground for advancing their political aims for our schools. They're using the puppet Scott Walker, who is more than willing to sell out our kids to such high-rolling bidders. They have trained him to use words like "choice" and "merit" as codes for long-term agendas toward privatization and segregation of schools. His efforts to "reform" education in Wisconsin are little more than a financial venture.
It's interesting that Ms. Bourenane's tactics include the misstatement that Gov. Walker and his allies "have the admitted goal of privatizing public education." I didn't take them Ms. Bourenane at her word (how could I?) and visited the American Federation of Children's Mission Statement webpage. Here's what their statement says:
The American Federation for Children is a leading national advocacy organization promoting school choice, with a specific focus on advocating for school vouchers and scholarship tax credit programs. The American Federation for Children is a 501(c)(4) organization. We are affiliated with the American Federation for Children PAC, a political committee that supports and opposes state-level candidates for elected office, and we work closely with our educational partner, the Alliance for School Choice, a 501(c)(3) organization, to promote the benefits of - and the need for - school choice.
Mission
The American Federation for Children, and the Alliance for School Choice, seek to improve our nation's K-12 education by advancing systemic and sustainable public policy that empowers parents, particularly those in low income families, to choose the education they determine is best for their children.
Ms. Bourenane's temper tantrum apparently was triggered by AFC's stated goal of "empower[ing] parents, particularly those in low income families, to chose the education they determine is best for their children.
It's probably unthinkable for Ms. Bourenane to grasp the concept that parents should have the ability to make decisions in the best interests of their children. Ms. Bourenane and the education community think that the K-12 budget should only go to government schools. In their thinking, they're entitled to that money.
The thought that parents should have a say in where that money goes and in how and where their children are educated is heresy to the well-funded teachers unions' thinking.
NEWSFLASH TO THE UNIONS: It isn't your money. It's the taxpayers' money and they should have a significant say in how and where it's spent.
Here's AFC's Vision Statement:
The American Federation for Children (AFC) seeks the fundamental transformation of public education through parental choice. We believe public education must be defined as providing families, particularly low-income families, with the public funding they need to choose the education they determine is best for their children.
The American Federation for Children envisions a vibrant and successful American education system where achievement is high and where low-income children are provided with the opportunity to attend the finest schools possible, whether these schools are excellent public schools, public charter schools, or private schools.
Based on this information, it's apparent that Ms. Bourenane's statement that Scott Walker, AFC and their allies want to privatize schools is a major overreaction to the truth.
Here's another of Ms. Bourenane's trumped-up allegations:
Further, Walker pushes a myth that the Wisconsin education system is in need of major reform, often blaming our excellent teachers for problems that do not exist. Wisconsin public schools are a national model in many areas, and we are number one in the nation in graduation rates, even as we spend less per pupil than most other states. With many of our schools already running on bare-bones budgets, Walker's cuts are devastating. Our kids are paying the price as Walker's funders cash in their checks.
How many of these schools that are "running on bare bones budgets" are overstaffed in administrators like Minneapolis is? How many of these budgets were hurt by the high health insurance premiums imposed by WEA Trust?
The teachers unions' stranglehold on health insurance was a major factor in putting school districts in the red. Ms. Bourenane's arguments are silly at best. They should be ignored from this point forward.
Posted Sunday, September 25, 2011 8:17 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 26-Sep-11 11:12 AM
You would like a Scott Walker in Minnesota? Or a Scott Brown? You say we need more Scotts?
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 26-Sep-11 11:20 AM
I'd love Scott Walker in Minnesota over the idiot currently occupying the Governor's Mansion. Gov. Walker's initiatives have put school districts, cities & the state on firmer financial ground while reducing health insurance expenses for government from the state to the local level. His plan gave businesses the incentive to hire people, which they're now doing at a quite sustainable rate.
Gov. Dayton & the DFL haven't figured out that their jobs bills need annual tax increases to artificially sustain them. Gov. Walker knows that lowering business costs leads to private sector job growth that feeds itself.
Why do I even bother?
This morning's At Issue With Tom Hauser was utterly predictable. During the Face-Off segment, Hauser asked the usual questions about President Obama's Son of Stimulus plan.
After that, Denise Cardinal recited her
First off, the only places where police officers and firefighters are getting laid off are in the liberal-dominated big cities like Minneapolis, aka the drinking fountain capital of the Midwest. What other city boasts of $50,000 artistic drinking fountains and bike trail coordinators while laying off police officers?
Cardinal is the public face of ABM, the progressive organization that ran the most expensive smear campaign in Minnesota gubernatorial history. ABM is funded mostly by Gov. Dayton's ex-wife, Alida Messinger . They're the corrupt organization that put together intellectually dishonest misinformation about Tom Emmer. This is the perfect example of their dishonesty:
Settle in high flying corporate executives, because Tom Emmer's Minnesota is going to be more fun than your last trip in a golden parachute. Here in Tom Emmer's Minnesota, we believe that paying for good schools and hospitals is the job of the unwashed masses. That's why the slightly regressive taxes of the past have been replaced by a massively regressive tax code in Tom Emmer's Minnesota.
In Tom Emmer's Minnesota, we don't even care if you have your interns set up post office boxes all over the world to avoid paying your taxes. Even if those funds would go to fund nursing homes and other medical facilities, in Tom Emmer's Minnesota we want nothing to get in the way of the gobs and gobs of money coming your way, not even fair play.
Rest assured, my very rich friend. This isn't just a one-time deal. You can trust that in Tom Emmer's Minnesota, solid investment in good schools, nursing home facilities, clean lakes, fixing roads or health care for 'regular folk' will never get in the way of your extreme wealth and stealthy tax maneuvering.
The point I'm making with this information is that Denise Cardinal couldn't identify the mainstream of Minnesota politics if her life depended on it. She's seen politics through the rose-colored glasses of a San Francisco hippie for so long that she'd likely identify Daniel Patrick Moynihan as being too moderate.
Her responsibility isn't to inform but to misinform. That's about the only thing she's good at.
Posted Sunday, September 25, 2011 10:40 PM
Comment 1 by eric z. at 26-Sep-11 06:03 PM
Do you see Emmer as a second spot ticket choice to balance things, presuming Mitt Romney gets the first spot GOP opportunity? Do you imagine a better ticket balance choice for Romney? I see Emmer for the spot.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 27-Sep-11 03:39 AM
Romney won't be the GOP nominee. Emmer won't be on anyone's short list because a) he ran a crappy campaign & b) he's totally untested & unknown.
