There are a lot of measures when looking at candidates, especially when we consider that in the gubernatorial race on the Republican side that we have 2 strong conservatives fighting for every possible delegate vote. Below are the endorsements listed to date for the candidates for the Republican governor’s race. I thought I’d apply the lifetime Taxpayers League ratings of these endorsers of each candidate and see how they stack up.
Thankfully, the Taxpayers League has been doing the hard work of their annual Legislative Scorecard for years rating all legislators each session based on the votes they consider the most important to you the taxpayer. Below is the simple math for the 2 candidates (including their scores) and their endorsers lifetime TLM 2009 ratings.
Marty Seifert 85% Sen. David Hann 94% Sen. Joe Gimse 54% Sen. Bill Ingebritsen 65% Sen. Julie Rosen 59% Sen. Dennis Frederickson 56% Sen. Dave Senjem 71% Rep. Pat Garofalo 71% Rep. Larry Howes 59% Rep. Denny McNamara 62% Rep. Joyce Peppin 92% Rep. Paul Anderson 67% Rep. Bob Dettmer 84% Rep. Steve Gottwalt 74% Rep. Bob Gunther 67% Rep. Mark Murdock 67% Rep. Bud Nornes 71% Rep. Torrey Westrom 74% Rep. Paul Torkelson 80% Rep. Doug Magnus 71%
1423 / 20 = Team Seifert = 71.1%
Tom Emmer 92% Sen. Amy Koch 88% Sen. Warren Limmer 93% Sen. Mike Jungbauer 78% Sen. Debbie Johnson 80% Sen. Pat Pariseau 85% Sen. Claire Robling 76% Rep. Mary Liz Holberg 88% Rep. Tim Kelly 87% Rep. Bruce Anderson 96% Rep. Laura Brod 81% Rep. Matt Dean 85% Rep. Mark Buesgens 95% Rep. Joe Hoppe 85% Rep. Tom Hackbarth 77% Rep. Steve Drazkowski 85% Rep. Peggy Scott 93% Rep. Tim Sanders 87% Rep. Dean Urdahl 58% Rep. Rod Hamilton 60% Rep. Tara Mack 64% Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer 93% Rep. Tony Cornish 67%
1893 / 23* = Team Emmer = 82.3%
*Sen. Mike Parry —Special Election No data yet
First, I want to thank all of the people on this list for the daily grind of fighting the progressive assault of increasing taxes. As of today Emmer has 4* more legislators, which gives him more room for error on his club, which actually makes their rating better than Seiferts. Another measure of this would be to drop Emmer’s lowest 3 and do it again, but you get the picture. Team Emmer is more than10 points higher on the side of the taxpayer. Something to consider when sizing up the candidates over the next 2 months.
WHERE: Upper Mall of Minnesota State Capitol, 75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. St. Paul, MN 55155
WHO: Minnesota Congressional Representatives and Advocacy Group Leaders. Speakers include:
Congresswoman Michele Bachmann
Twila Brase, CCHC
Others (to be confirmed)
Although every major poll clearly shows a supermajority of Americans oppose the current health care ‘reform’ bill, Nancy Pelosi is planning to ram the bill through Congress with a vote scheduled for March 18.
If you care about preserving your right to make health care decisions for you and your family, please be sure to come to Saturday’s rally. Bring a sign demonstrating your opposition to the bill.
Our 21 year old daughter is currently in her Junior year at one of our taxpayer funded State of MN Universities and she has frequently complained about how much liberal indoctrination she is forced to endure in the course of her daily studies. I think they finally pushed her over the edge today as I received the following text message from her while she was in class. (actually two text messages as she couldn't fit her rant into less than 160 characters)
Ohhhhhh...we're "learning" about white privilege in class today! I just LOVE my liberal- [expletive] school! Whites are causing all the problems and thank [expletive] God we have an African American Prez who will solve all our problems.
Other than the expletives I have to say I'm plenty proud of her. I've had the pleasure of meeting some of her friends and fortunately there are a few of the younger generation who can see right through the indoctrination. On the other hand it is unfortunate as she explains that a majority of her classmates buy into it all. Any one who doubts the stories about how liberal the universites are only need talk to a conservative leaning student about what utopian ideas were being force fed to them in their classes and passed off on as fact.
Mmmm....I wonder where she learned about all those conservative principles?
Hell may have frozen over. I am going to quote something from the Strib. On their Opinion Page of Tuesday, March 9, three Minneapolis citizens penned thoughts which tell me the castle walls of public education may be beginning to crumble, the veneer may be beginning to peel.
The three contributors, Don Samuels, city councilman, Chanda Baker, director of strategic partners for Pillsbury United Communities and Sondra Samuels, president of the PEACE Foundation, take strategic and targeted aim at Tom Dooher, president of Education Minnesota.
Get this quote from their op/ed:
“Education Minnesota’s hollow defense of the status quo is a cynical, morally bankrupt agenda, which focuses more on protecting the adult members of teacher unions than protecting the interests of the state’s most vulnerable children. Dooher (Education Minnesota’s president) has become the last holdout for the failed status quo, one that has yielded no significant change to the achievement gap over the last three decades. His commitment to thwarting real reform has blocked every bridge that spans the racial and socioeconomic performance gap.”
“So the next time we hear more statistics on the tragic inequities of Minnesota schools, we must move from naïve frustration to a passionate insistence that Education Minnesota move out of the way of progress.”
My jaw almost hit the floor. In the past, the black community in Minneapolis could be counted on to walk across the coals for public school teachers. The language in this summary is unequivocal – and damning. They’re throwing down the gauntlet for public ed. They don’t like what’s going on and they don’t see it being fixed unless, and until, there is a drastic, radical and dramatic shift in the basic structure of the unions. This ought to signal the political class that in spite of their sky-is-falling defense of teachers and their unions – knowledge knows no color.
Mike Wigley is the the top dog in terms of Minnesota fiscal conservative activist names, and Team Emmer announced the founder of the Taxpayers League of Minnesota's endorsement today.
Mike Wigley, the founder of the Taxpayers League of Minnesota announced today he is supporting Tom Emmer for Governor. Wigley cited Rep. Emmer’s strong track record as an advocate for lowering taxes and reducing government spending as the main reason for his endorsement.
“I’ve had the opportunity to work with a lot of elected officials and I know Tom Emmer is a man who will never waver in his support of Minnesota’s families and taxpayers,” said Wigley. “As a small business owner, Tom Emmer is the unique politician who understands what it is like to sign the front of a paycheck, not just the back. Tom is exactly the person with the vision and leadership to bring Minnesota back to prosperity, by creating an environment that lets Minnesotans create jobs.”
“Mike is the gold standard in our state when it comes to fiscal responsibility,” said Emmer. “He helped create a new era of accountability for elected officials when it comes to taxes and spending and I’m very proud to have his support.”
Rep. Emmer has represented Wright County in the Minnesota House of Representatives since 2005 and has a 92% lifetime rating with the Taxpayers League of Minnesota.
I had to look it up, but a "Hobson's choice" is when both solutions to any given dilemma are equally unpleasant. Actually I had to work my way through an ordinary dilemma just to get to this one. What I was trying to figure out was what to do about the health care debate in Congress. We've been told repeatedly that we need to call and write our congressman and urge defeat of this monstrosity. But my congressman has always voted no, WILL always vote no and has said that he would vote no twice if allowed to do so. So the first dilemma is: If writing to my Congressman would be pointless, then should I be writing or calling other members of Congress, such as the Democrats in the Minnesota delegation? Doing nothing really doesn't seem a good option, so that brings up the Hobson's choice:
If I write a letter and threaten to vote these Democrats out of office if they vote yes, and they turn around and vote no, Obamacare might fail and they might get reelected. That would leave Democrats in charge and that would be a very bad thing. If, however, I do NOT write and urge the no vote, they might vote yes (again), Obamacare might pass, and that, too, would be a very bad thing, or maybe worse. Here's what I'm thinking of sending:
"Honored Sir (or Madam)
I strongly urge you to vote NO on the Senate health care bill that is before you. This would be good for you and good for me. I intend to work for, and donate to, your Republican opponent in November regardless of your vote, but if you vote yes I will have to work a lot harder, though I will have a lot more help. You will then be more likely to lose your seat. Bad for me, bad for you.
Senator Ray Vandeveer speaks out in favor of lifting the ban on increasing our nuclear power in Minnesota. He states it plainly to his colleagues in the Senate—if you don't have a solution then say so with your vote.
On Thursday 03/04/2010 in the Minnesota Senate Energy Committee there was an amendment offered by Senator John Doll which would effectively gut a bill to lift the moratorium on consideration of nuclear power in Minnesota.
Senator Ray Vandeveer lays out in very simple and understandable terms what favoring the Doll amendment and unwillingness to consider nuclear power as an energy source mean to the future of Minnesotans.
Received from our friend and milblogger, Mark Martin of New Hope, MN:
A guy from the comic strip Doonesbury came across my blog, and asked if he could repost some of them at the comic's website. Apparently they run a milblog reposting site for veterans currently serving in the combat zones. Here is the link: http://gocomics.typepad.com/the_sandbox/
He has chosen to lead off with the Afghan comic strip which shows a young boy contacting police about a bad guy planting improvised explosive devices. He was excited about this since it came on the heels of "The Hurt Locker" winning the Oscar for best picture. I didn't have the heart to tell him that "The Hurt Locker" was quite possibly the most fouled up Army movie ever made and was completely untrue to life. Oh well...
I recently came across an Afghan paper, published by Hamid Karzai's government, which encourages people to stand up and take responsibility for their communities. This cartoon, which should be read from right to left in the Afghan reading style, depicts a good neighbor informing the police about a bad guy planting an Improvised Explosive Device.
The bottom line is this: Hearts and minds of the local populace in any given neighborhood is the key. If we can convince the Afghan people that we are here to help, not hinder, through our actions and our deeds, then maybe we can convince them to help us drive the bad guys out of their neighborhoods so that they can pursue their lives in peace. Nice thought....
Mark is serving in Afghanistan and returning this summer. His milblog, 270 Days In Afghanistan is a must-read. Comments there are welcome.
Rather than vote to lift the ban so we could consider increasing nuclear power in Minnesota, the senate decided to kick it down the road, prolonging the place we might have in the cue a few more places behind more logical buyers like India and China. Pat Kessler has a write up, calling the bill 'on hold' (read: still a ban).
A key vote on the future of expanded nuclear power in Minnesota has been put on hold. A senate committee tabled discussion about a plan to lift the moratorium on new nuclear power in the state.
The delay puts the bill in serious jeopardy. It's a signal many Minnesota lawmakers aren't even ready to consider more nuclear power in the future.
Even if Minnesota's moratorium lifted today, it'd take at least a decade and billions of dollars to plan and build a large nuclear facility.
A few months ago, congressmen Erik Paulsen (CD3 R) and Tim Walz (CD1 D) announced a presser, advocating ending the moratorium in Minnesota to increase the nuclear power plants in Minnesota. I was thrilled, not just to have attention put by federeal level reps, but by a united effort from both parties. Today, they put out an op-ed in the Strib.
If Minnesota is to participate in this advantageous shift, it must drop its ban.
President Obama recently announced that the federal government will support the construction of two nuclear reactors in Georgia by providing $8.3 billion in loan guarantees. Construction of the reactors, the first in the United States in more than 30 years, would represent an important step forward in a debate that has long divided political parties, advocacy groups and elected officials.
For decades, the debate over nuclear energy has been stalled, largely along ideological lines. During that time, our nation's primary energy sources have drastically narrowed. Our emissions have increased. High and volatile energy prices have become standard. As a result, our nation is heavily reliant on energy sources that come from countries and regions often hostile to our interests.
The recognition that we must address these critical issues has changed the nuclear debate for the better. There is little disagreement that we must diversify our energy portfolio to meet future energy needs. Equally important, there is a growing consensus that nuclear energy must be a part of that equation.
As an energy source, nuclear energy is on par with traditional sources like coal and natural gas. Unlike with some renewable sources, we can count on it for consistent power -- come rain, snow, sun or clouds. The U.S. Department of Energy forecasts that the United States will need 28 percent more electricity by 2035, so new power sources are critical. Nuclear plants are also the lowest-cost producer of always-available electricity.
Nuclear energy is clean, preventing the emission of nearly 700 million metric tons of carbon dioxide each year in the United States, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute. Expanding it will allow us to meet our energy needs while reducing our carbon emissions in the long term -- a true win-win.
Finally, with technological advances and the most stringent safety standards in the energy industry, nuclear energy is far safer today than it has ever been. Nuclear plants are very closely regulated and are among the most heavily guarded facilities in the country. European plants continue to demonstrate the success of safety advances, and we can model a new generation of American plants after these successes.
A few years ago, it would have been difficult to find members of Congress from different political parties working together on this issue. It would have been difficult to find businesses, labor and environmental groups working together on this issue. However, that is exactly what is happening today right here in Minnesota, where a broad coalition of those supporting nuclear energy expansion is taking hold.
Unfortunately, Minnesota still remains hindered by one major obstacle: the state's longstanding ban on nuclear power plant expansion. Under current law, construction of new nuclear power plants -- like the project underway in Georgia -- cannot even be considered in our state. This ban puts Minnesota at a competitive disadvantage at a time when momentum for nuclear energy is clearly moving in the right direction.
With the Minnesota Legislature back in session, we are reiterating our call for lawmakers to lift this ban in order to open up new opportunities for nuclear expansion. Doing so will keep Minnesota at the forefront of an energy revolution in this country.
In the meantime, we will continue pushing for needed action at the federal level, most notably on the nuclear waste storage issue. The Obama administration recently announced the members of a Blue Ribbon Commission panel charged with finding a safe storage site for nuclear waste. We believe this panel must work quickly to develop a solution, and we will be pressing for timely and decisive action.
We also will continue to pursue measures that will streamline the nuclear permitting process to help encourage growth, while above all ensuring that any new projects adhere to the strictest safety standards. Finally, we will continue working on our bipartisan legislation to create a diverse energy plan for the United States, with nuclear energy serving as a key component.
Erik Paulsen, a Republican, and Tim Walz, a Democrat, are members of the U.S. House. They represent Minnesota's Third and First congressional districts, respectively.
Thank you gentlemen. I know you'll get the support of Governor Pawlenty. Now, what say you DFL leaders of House and Senate?
The majority of the state senate district conventions are over, but there are still many to go. Mine is this weekend—SD45 Republicans is this Saturday at Robbinsdale Middle School (map). We have had all of them there since I've been living in this area, and the auditorium has always been able to accommodate. I understand we may have a larger than usual attendance as the pulse of the GOP is strong now, and that's a good thing.
Both the heavy hitters for governor, Marty Seifert and Tom Emmer should be there and that is the key focus for those coming this year. We have 22 seats for delegates in CD5, and 4 in CD3. I’ll be there bright and early because I am on the candidate interview board for representatives. I know of one for sure, Nick Petersen, who has been a known candidate for the senate for over a year. The house candidates I am not clear on. There has been a 2 steps forward 1 step back process with our house A and B candidates, and I hope we will have a full slate of 3 endorsed candidates by Saturday afternoon. I notice on Nick’s website, he has taken a pledge that taxpayers should be pleased with:
My pledge to you is that I WILL TAKE NO PER DIEM, PERIOD. If elected, the taxpayers will provide my $31,000 salary to do the job they elected me to do, not any extra for a busy session, extra work load or perfect attendance.
I will be twittering updates this Saturday, please use hash tag #SS2 (Super Saturday dos)wor whatever convention you are writing from, and if you live in the area—East Plymouth, New Hope, North Golden Valley, Crystal, Robbinsdale—please attend.
John at Power Line gives Governor Tim Pawlenty credit where it's due: holding firm on reining in DFL spending despite the hysterics over GAMC budget cuts:
Pawlenty is a gutsy administrator, as demonstrated most recently by his line item veto of $381 million for a health care program for low-income adults. This, of course, was part of his overall effort to balance the state's budget, as is constitutionally required. But the Democrats reacted predictably; they tried to stir up hysteria in the press and made a strong effort to override the governor's veto.
Thankfully, enough Republicans stood firm and upheld the veto. DFL and other activists attempted tugging on public heartstrings, denouncing Pawlenty of not caring for the poor. But they didn't tell the public that some will still qualify and some are being moved to Minnesota Care and other programs. They also have difficulty with the reality of math: the GAMC program would have ballooned from $550 million in the 2008-2009 budget cycle to $748 million in the next biennium - equaling an unsustainable program.
Pawlenty said up to 15,000 of those clients may qualify for the Minnesota Care program, which is fee-based and subsidized by a tax on health care providers instead of the state's general fund dollars.
"We're the only state in the nation that has a program like this," he said, "We have the most generous social service, welfare and publicly subsidized health care in the country. But they're growing out of control and we can't wait until they bankrupt us."
We have a duty to care for the poor, but we differ on the means to care for them in a fiscally responsible manner. If DFL legislators cannot figure out how to cut spending and resorting to theatrics to get their way, I'll be happy to send them a carton of tissues when they become the minority party this November.
The tallies over at MDE have the Republican Governor's race shaping up to be a squeeker and it is adding a lot of energy to the BPOU and CD conventions. All the more reason to have a debate that focuses exclusively on the 2 top contenders, because let's face it this is a 2 man contest. And the event is already on the books. March 18th Armstrong High School—See you there!
Okay, I only say I "hate" slates because it rhymes better, but I didn't know why I strongly disliked them until today. Slates, for those who don't know, are lists of delegates to the local BPOU convention that everyone receiving the slate is supposed to vote for to become delegates to the congressional district and state conventions. I hadn't seen them in many years and I thought perhaps they had fallen from favor. I know some BPOUs actually tried to ban them the last time around, but I see they're back. I had been wondering how some of the local bloggers had been posting lists of delegates committed to the various gubernatorial candidates; now I know. It's those darn slates.
Now I don't know, at this point, whether I am elected a delegate or not, so this isn't just sour grapes. I have some very real concerns about the practice. It only seems to occur when we have a contested governor's race, and that explains both why it occurs and why I object to it. That is:
It occurs because it is of real benefit to the gubernatorial candidates to elect as many of their known supporters as they can and perhaps make a first ballot victory possible. If nothing else it is an obvious measure of campaign organization effectiveness. It is hard to begrudge the campaigns for trying to win, but...
I object because it gives a strong advantage to those potential delegates whose only qualification is a presumed allegiance to a particular gubernatorial candidate. There are many other duties of a delegate, including attendance at the Congressional District Convention and endorsement of congressional candidates, deciding the endorsement among candidates for other statewide offices, debate on the platform, and a year from now, debate on the CD and Party Constitutions, and other important matters. Beneath all of it is a commitment to work for the Party and ALL of its candidates year round, not just on convention day.
My second objection is that, even in this year's accelerated convention season, we are still months from the State Convention and the endorsement decision. A lot of things can happen between now and then that might reasonably alter that decision, unless people have already made promises to the candidate or to themselves that they feel obligated to keep regardless of new information. Being on a slate might even tend to keep people from looking for this new information. Now is not necessarily, as Ronald Reagan said, "A Time for Choosing."
Last but not at all least, I continue to worry that, regardless of how the decision to "become a delegate for" a particular candidate is made-- prematurely or not, well-considered or not-- that people will look for reasons to support that decision and, by the time of convention, be so invested in that decision they will not be able to support any other outcome, thus snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. I dislike slates, but what I really hate is having Democrats win by default. Being a delegate means never having to say you're sorry.
Today, candidate for Governor Tom Emmer announced two big supporters (via The Pioneer Press):
Brian Sullivan and Vin Weber announced their support for Emmer today in his neck-and-neck race with fellow Republican state Rep. Marty Seifert. The party will endorse a candidate in late April.
Sullivan serves on the Republican National Committee and ran for governor himself in 2002. Weber is a former Minnesota congressman who spends most of his time now as a political strategist and lobbyist in Washington.
This is an opportune time to plug Senate District 45's "One on One" Governor Debate on Thursday, March 18 in Plymouth. You can submit questions to the candidates here, and meet with them one hour prior to the start of the forum. The race between Seifert and Emmer, two very strong contenders, is heating up — and this event promises to be a good one:
This is required listening today, as you'll likely hear liberal Obama seminar callers phone in conservative talk show hosts with "discussion points." Allapundit writes:
Imagine the tremendous persuasive effect of listening to Obama cultists leadenly reading off a list of “Discussion Points” to, say, Mark Levin. Radio magic worthy of Paul Harvey, my friends.
The true value of this moronic scheme is that it gives me an excuse to post this bit from Beck’s radio show today. If you missed the health-care summit, don’t worry — this captures 90 percent of the Democrats’ argument. Thanks to the Right Scoop, as always, for clipping it.
Rep. Kline appeared on Fox News this morning and discusses the "bi-partisan" summit on health care reform, offering market-based solutions and saying the summit ought to "start with a blank piece of paper"...
I watched the interview and in depth story of the movie with the film's producers on Hannity tonight. This really looks fantastic. It should be mandatory viewing for every high school and college student. For some students twice a year.
The current economic crisis is not a failure of capitalism, but a failure of culture. Generation Zero explores the cultural roots of the global financial meltdown - beginning with the narcissism of the 1960's, spreading like a virus through the self-indulgent 90's, and exploding across the world in the present economic cataclysm.
Generation Zero goes beneath the shallow media headlines and talking head sound bites to get to the source of today's economic nightmare. With a cutting edge style and haunting imagery, this must see documentary will change everything you thought you knew about Wall Street and Washington.
Featuring experts, authors, and pundits from across the political spectrum, Generation Zero exposes the little told story of how the mindset of the baby boomers sowed the seeds of economic disaster that will be reaped by coming generations.
(
A 
