St. Paul attorney John Gilmore, who represents former Bachmann chief of staff Andy Parrish, also confirmed that his client is among those being interviewed by the FBI as a witness. “Andy Parrish has been contacted by the FBI for purposes of an interview,” Gilmore said. “That has been set up for next week and Mr. Parrish will cooperate fully.” . . .
. . .One source familiar with the FBI inquiry said an agent from the bureau’s public integrity section expressed interest in campaign finance allegations contained in a Federal Election Commission (FEC) complaint brought by whistleblower Peter Waldron, a Florida pastor who worked on the Bachmann presidential campaign in Iowa.
. . . In an affidavit to the Iowa Senate earlier this month, [Iowa State Senator Kent] Sorenson denied being paid directly or indirectly by any “Bachmann entities.” That contradicts an earlier affidavit from Parrish describing an “arrangement” to pay Sorenson through Short’s company. Parrish’s affidavit said Bachmann was aware of the arrangement, but thought it was legal. . . .
Read it and weep at the Star Tribune
Bluestem is curious about the status of Bachmann's seat should the investigations mature. As readers may recall, Bachmann barely won in the 2012 election, beating DFL challenger Jim Graves by 4,296 votes in a district where Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney received nearly 6 percentage points of the vote than she.
We've heard and read rumors that many Republicans wish she would retire. That set Bluestem to wondering how the GOP could find a candidate who isn't a client of John Gilmore. Perhaps Tom Emmer would be interested in the job.
While winter's pale blue eyes linger on here in Chippewa County, signs of spring are making a tentative entrance: a wren taking shelter in the garage during an ice storm, Tundra Swans wondering if this might be the place, a puzzled Yellow-Rumped Warbler perplexed by the snow, and this cycle's announcement by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) that Blue Dog Representative Collin Peterson is high on its list of targets.
In its first targeted campaign of the season, the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of House Republicans, aired televised attack ads this month against Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn. — more than 18 months before voters go to the polls.
The ads attempted to tie Peterson to President Obama and his health care reform law, the Affordable Care Act, both unpopular in his sprawling rural district. “Instead of voting to balance the budget, he voted to spend $1.8 trillion on Obamacare,” a narrator said in the ad.
Peterson did not vote for the Affordable Care Act, but voted against its repeal. He also voted against the House Republican budget, which brings federal spending in line with revenues over 10 years.
Peterson laughed off the attack. “They don’t have anybody else to go after,” he said. “It’s kind of ridiculous, but whatever.” . . .
. . .The NRCC spent $2,000 on the early ad campaign against Peterson, which is a paltry sum, said John Geer, a political scientist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. “It’s just not that much money.”
We're hoping that former state senator and ethically-challenged tweep Kvetchin' Gretchen Hoffman runs. Not because this would help the Republican Party's odds, but because Bluestem could revive our Tales of Hoffman series. She's rich, she's crabby, and she's from North Dakota. What's not for the RNC to love?
And then there's the press release, which is crystal clear about Peterson's offenses to humanity:
After chiding Peterson for expecting “Minnesota seniors to foot the bill for his unbalanced, irresponsible priorities,” the statement from communications director Andrea Bozek read: “Peterson owes Utah families an explanation for his poor record, and his support of wildly expensive law that hurts jobs and Utah’s seniors.”
That should provoke outrage from Biscay to Climax.
Photo: Utah, the extreme western part of Minnesota's Seventh District.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
Eighteen months ago, the Minnesota House member was considered an
unlikely but undeniable Republican rising star, winning the Iowa straw
poll that unofficially begins the primary season. Today, she is
embroiled in a litany of legal proceedings related to her rolling
disaster of a presidential campaign—including a Office of Congressional
Ethics investigation into campaign improprieties that has not previously
been reported.
The Daily Beast has learned that
federal investigators are now interviewing former Bachmann campaign
staffers nationwide about alleged intentional campaign-finance
violations. The investigators are working on behalf of the Office of
Congressional Ethics, which probes reported improprieties by House
members and their staffs and then can refer cases to the House Ethics
Committee.
“I
have been interviewed by investigators,” says Peter Waldron, a former
Bachmann staffer who’s embroiled in his own fight with his former boss,
involving his allegations of pay-to-play politics and improper payments by the campaign—making
him one of several members of Bachmann’s inner circle who’ve fallen out
with the woman they once hoped would become commander in chief. While
he was careful to avoid specifics in regard to the investigating body,
Waldron said that “investigators came [and] interviewed me and are
interviewing other staff members across the country.”
Two
other former staffers confirmed the existence of the investigation this
weekend, and on Monday Bachmann’s campaign counsel, William McGinley,
of the high-powered firm Patton Boggs, confirmed that the Office of
Congressional Ethics (OCE) was looking into the congresswoman’s
presidential campaign last year.
“There
are no allegations that the Congresswoman engaged in any wrongdoing,”
McGinley said. “We are constructively engaged with the OCE and are
confident that at the end of their Review the OCE Board will conclude
that Congresswoman Bachmann did not do anything inappropriate.” . . .
Read the lengthy article at the Daily Beast for the whole story, which comes on the heels of a very bad week for the Gentlewoman from Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District. As we noted over the weekend in St. Cloud Times: the two faces of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann:
Unlike our reluctant spring, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann has
roared back on to the national spotlight as speeches to CPAC and her
congressional colleagues were fact checked; the findings were not
pretty.
Political junkies, partisans and the media are abuzz as to whether a
closer-than-expected 2012 re-election victory changed the divisive tone
and lightning-rod tactics of U.S. Sixth District Rep. Michele Bachmann.
Two
events — a national speech Saturday and a St. Paul lobbying appearance
Monday — not only reflect how there is no clear answer to that question,
but highlight why district voters will remain frustrated if all they
want is a hardworking, level-headed House member.
The Saturday speech was vintage Bachmann — heavy on political red
meat and light on accuracy. Monday’s lobbying effort for expanding
Interstate 94 from Rogers to St. Cloud was about bipartisan service to
the western end of the district — a rare focus for her since elected.
CPAC speech
Up
until Saturday, there was a growing body of evidence — best symbolized
by her post-election low profile in national media — that Bachmann might
be taking to heart a message district voters delivered Election Day:
Her style isn’t what they want in Washington.
Yes,
the Tea Party champion won a fourth term. But it came by only about
4,200 votes in a long-held GOP district redrawn since 2010 to be even
more conservative. Plus, she needed a record amount of money and
outspent first-time candidate Jim Graves by $9.3 million. Yet she barely
won. . . .
Read the rest at the Times. They're hoping that they'll see more of
the bread-and-butter Bachmann, but her behavior in the House suggests
that's wishful thinking.
There's been much appreciative murmuring--much of it on the left--for Some facts Minnesota conservatives can't ignore, a piece co-authored by Norm Coleman and current U of M Regent/former Minnesota state representative Laura Brod (R-Once Upon A Time In New Prague).
Conservatives need to accept that Minnesotans are
not anti-government. They believe that government has a legitimate role
to play in Minnesota. . . .
The Minnesota GOP, and conservative candidates,
will continue to lose ground with Minnesotans unless we dramatically
change our level of empathy towards the people we seek to support.
The fact is, Minnesotans want a social safety net to support
those who may need help from time to time. Republicans shouldn't be seen
as attempting to dismantle the social safety net, but working to make
it more efficient, effective and truly capable of helping those who can
get on their feet, and do so with compassion.
Minnesotans support business and job creation, but they believe
that Republicans have become too concerned with defending the wealthy
and corporate interests at the expense of workers and small businesses.
While in reality this may not be accurate, perception is reality.
We should not support positions that are not only unattainable, but
unsupportable by a majority of Minnesotans.
Listening to Minnesotans when they tell us they support a certain
level of government that is efficient and effective should not be met
with calls by conservatives to dismantle government and eliminate
agencies simply for the sake of downsizing without drawing out the
argument to focus on the trade-offs if we do not act. . . .
Conservatism intent on focusing on economic issues,
improving the efficiency and effectiveness of government, ensuring that
those who most need help in our society are able to have the support
they need while still standing firm on their principles with regard to
social issues, will gain support and trust from Minnesota voters. . . .
Laura Brod delivered a slightly different message to the Southwest Metro Tea Party Patriot (SMTPP) multitudes gathered at the Chanhassen Rec Center on August 16, 2010 when she appeared on a double bill with right radio talker Sue Jeffers.
Brod seems to be modeling herself off of Coleman's earlier example, although she's pulling leftward after her courtship of the Tea Party, whereas Coleman veered right, ambitiously switching parties in the 1990s.
We have such a tremendous opportunity as conservatives. You know you guys are feared, don't you? Look around you. You're scary. And that's exciting, because that means that the liberal left understands the value of this movement. They understand the power of this movement and it's not because you're scary people, it's because you speak scary things called common sense.
Now the liberals don't like common sense. They didn't like it way back when, they don't like it today, because they would like to have their reality, they would like to have their "interpretation" of the Constitution, they would like to have their "interpretation" of where we have to go as a country, but it's actually quite simple. Life. Liberty. Property (or the pursuit of happiness).
Nevermind that those items are in the Declaration of Independence. She is being simple and this is "common sense" after all. She continues:
Limited government, lower taxes, that works. And people understand it. . . .
And that's a scary message to the liberals, because they want everybody to be victims. This victimology that we have out there from the left tells you as an individual that, you know what, you could be better if only the government would help you. You really could, you know that don't you, right?
But the fact is that people are rejecting that, you are rejecting that because you're here tonight, and the left and their media allies like to say that the Tea Party is this or the tea party is that,. . .it's a fiscal call to arms that we have in this country and in this state . . .
Later Brod talks about making tough choices and buckling down on spending. Granted she doesn't claim to be willing to take it out of the hide of the "victims," but she doesn't bring up any other target it her 2010 talk.
Surrounded by hundreds of supporters at the Minnesota state capitol holding signs bearing the slogan "Don't lie to children," National Organization Brian Brown chose instead to lie to adults.
The group trying to block same-sex marriage in Minnesota vowed a
tenacious battle Thursday, saying their opponents’ push to rewrite the
state’s marriage laws is at odds with the beliefs of most Minnesotans.
“We will not stop fighting for the truth,” said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage.
Brown was a featured speaker at a Capitol rally that drew about 1,000
residents who oppose same-sex marriage, many carrying signs saying,
“Don’t lie to children.”
Brown’s group was the top contributor to Minnesota for Marriage,
which failed to persuade Minnesotans to cement the state’s current ban
of same-sex marriage into the state Constitution.
Brown said the other side insisted during the campaign that the
amendment was not necessary because it wouldn’t change anything. Now
same-sex marriage advocates are trying to change the law.
“Minnesotans were sold a false bill of goods,” Brown said.
Well, no. As Minnesotans United for All Families director Richard Carlbom pointed out to Helgeson in the article, those seeking to extend the blessings of marriage did no such thing.
Rather, Minnesotans United made the positive case for marriage freedom. Take this moving television ad, incorporating former state representative John Kriesel's passionate floor speech for the right of all to marry during the debate to put the amendment on the ballot:
Corporal Andrew Wilfarht. He gave his life in Afghanistan protecting our freedoms. He was gay. I cannot look at this picture and say, ‘Corporal, you were good enough to fight for your country and give your life, but you were not good enough to marry the person you love. I'm pleading with you: vote no.
Or this online video featuring former state representative Duane Benson, a Republican and former Minnesota State Senator, Executive Director of
the Minnesota Business Partnership and professional football player. In the video below, Benson acknowledges that a "No" vote means that marriage restriction wouldn't be enshrined in the constitution, but he adds that not doing so is important because the conversation about extending the freedom to marry to same-gender couples needs to move forward.
There's plenty more to check out at the group's Youtube channel. Did Brown imagine the television ads and online video pieces suddenly vanished after the defeat of the amendment?
Back to Brown's foolish fib. It wasn't just Minnesotans United making the case to vote no so that the discussion about marriage equality could go forward. Here's the radio ad from Minnesotans for Equality, featuring one of the highest-profile marriage equality spokesters, Vikings punter Chris Kluwe:
Brown claiming to fight for "truth"? Perhaps we'll next see Tom Petters show up and make the case for "business ethics" as a substitute for state and local regulation of industrial sand mining operations.
"The campaign was won by simply telling lies," Brown said. "One of the
lies was that there was no threat of same-sex marriage, that's now
coming home to roost."
If Bluestem didn't know that Brown lives in Virginia, we'd wonder what planet he's from, because he seems to have missed what the conversation was last year in Minnesota.
Photo: Brown's supporters yesterday at the capitol, via Capitol Chatter.
If you appreciate reading posts on Bluestem Prairie, consider making a donation via paypal:
The official action follows the sand storm of criticism that swirling after he accepted the job as Executive Director of the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council. Critics felt that Egan couldn't serve two masters in the heart of Minnesota's battleground over the expansion of sand mining.
A preliminary timeline for the special election to replace Egan sets the special election for Tuesday, June 11.
Here's the text of the letter:
To: Lisa Bayley, President Red Wing City Council
Kay Kuhlmann, City Administrator
From: Mayor Dennis P Egan
RE: Resignation April 1, 2013
Red Wing has been home for my family the last 14 years and I have worked hard to ensure Red Wing is viewed as a special place to live, visit, and work. I am proud to serve as Mayor, and take my responsibilities as mayor very seriously.
In the last few weeks, people have expressed concern that I have recently taken work for the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council that may conflict with my duties as Mayor. I am pleased that the city attorney opined via letter that there is not a conflict of interest in my position, and I can continue to serve the city as its mayor.
Yet, I believe that a mayor must live to a higher standard than just avoiding conflicts of interest.
The position of Mayor is one of public service, and if a mayor' s activities serve as a distraction or roadblock for the city, the public is not well- served. The last few weeks have demonstrated that my new position can serve as a distraction to the city and my family, something that I cannot tolerate as Mayor.
Therefore, I will be resigning as Mayor of Red Wing on April 1, 2013. I will work with the City Council to ensure a transition that will not jeopardize the work we need accomplished at City Hall.
After then, I will refocus my time towards my family and growing my small business. I am confident I will stay involved with the Community of Red Wing just in a different capacity.
We should never lose our willingness to maintain the balance of interests, that has made Red Wing a strong city. This city on the working Mississippi River supports jobs, economic opportunity, a strong community and respect for the environment. We must never lose the ability to bring people together to look at facts, share information and make decisions that are in the best interest of our community.
I am honored to have had the opportunity to be the Mayor of Red Wing, and I look forward to continuing to serving this community.
There's a resolution accepting the resignation prepared for the city council's approval on Monday, March 11, 2013:
The resolution:
RESOLUTION NO. 6536
Resolution Accepting Resignation of Mayor and Ordering a Special Election
WHEREAS, Mayor Dennis Egan submitted his resignation from the office of mayor in
writing on March 7, 2013 to be effective April 1, 2013;
WHEREAS, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 351. 01, subdivision 3( b), a
resignation may be made to take effect on a future date and is deemed effective at 12: 01 a. m. on the stated date;
WHEREAS, Section 2. 06 of the Red Wing City Charter provides that a vacancy in the
office of mayor shall be filled by a special election;
WHEREAS, when a future vacancy becomes certain to occur and the vacancy must be filled by special election, Minnesota Statutes Section 351. 055 authorizes the City to begin procedures leading to the special election so that a successor may be elected at the earliest possible time;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Red Wing, that:
1. The Council hereby accepts the resignation of Mayor Egan, effective at 12: 01 a.m. on April 1.
2. The Council hereby directs the City Clerk to begin procedures leading to the special election so that a successor may be elected at the earliest possible time.
If Minnesotans who work to preserve voting rights think they had it rough defeating the voter restriction amendment last year, they should count their blessings.
Some Republicans in the House have introduced a suite of
disenfranchising bills under the guise of fixing North Dakota’s “voter
fraud problem,” despite North Dakota Secretary of State Al Jaeger and
the Burleigh and Cass County auditors testifying that there is almost no
voter fraud — and maybe even none at all — in North Dakota. . . .
But the worst bill is not a bill at all. Rep. Randy Boehning,
R-Fargo, completely replaced his own HB 1332 with a “hog house”
amendment (so-called because the first time an amendment supplanted a
bill, the subject had to do with pigsties) that would get rid of voter
affidavits and require ALL voters to show ID, both at the polls and for
absentee voting. . . .
. . .Getting rid of affidavit voting and
requiring absentee voters to have state-issued ID’s would be the biggest
change in North Dakota election policy since the Legislature granted
“no excuse” absentee voting and maybe the greatest step backward in
North Dakota voting accessibility ever.
The public has not
had a chance to weigh in on the potential changes because the new HB
1332 technically is an amendment. Only bills get public hearings — not
amendments.
Heckova way to foist photo ID on North Dakota voters. Read the rest for all the gory details.
It is a fact universally acknowledged that Senator Warren Limmer may be one of the principal architects of the DFL majority in both houses of the Minnesota legislature.
Bluestem wishes we could say, for the sake of our state, that the ruin of his earnest desire in the constitutional establishment of one of his prejudices has produced so happy an effect as to make him a sensible, amiable, well-informed man for the rest of his life; though perhaps it is lucky for bloggers, who might not have relished felicity in so unusual a form, that he still is occasionally nervous and invariably silly.
The argument over the idea reignited simmering tensions about the voter ID proposal, which lost dramatic support in closing months before the November election.
State Sen. Warren Limmer, R-Maple Grove, another sponsor of voter ID, raised doubts about the legality of absentee voting. Minnesotans can vote absentee before an election if they are disabled or sick or if they expect to be traveling during an election.
Sen. Ann Rest, DFL-New Hope, warned Limmer and other legislators against edging toward a constitutional showdown over absentee voting.
“Senator Limmer, you are disenfranchising the vote of every singe member of the military,” Rest said. “I don’t think you want to go there.”
Limmer shot back: “I am not going to sit here and be questioned about my motive and be warned not to go somewhere.”
The hearing was filled with elderly, the disabled and others speaking in favor of early voting.
With that sort of performance, Bluestem wonders whether this might be the time to abandon political blogging, pull up stakes and move to Big Stone or Lac Qui Parle County and write nothing but blank verse until Terry Vanderpol's cows come home or John White quits fishing.
Our work here is done--and by Republicans.
Photo: Warren Limmer, the Mrs. Bennet of the Republican Party of Minnesota.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
In the November 2012 election, Representative Bob Barrett (R-Lindstrom) defeated Rick Olseen by fewer than 400 votes, with Barrett earning "10,644 votes, or 50.87 percent. Olseen saw 10,251 ballots cast for him," according to the Forest Lake Times.
We'll never know how much false information circulated by the Barrett campaign contributed to that narrow victory. The flyer--mailed in the last week of the campaign--will cost the Lindstrom Republican $1000.
A panel of three administrative law judges ruled last week that "clear and convincing evidence Barrett and his campaign committee
violated Minnesota Statute 211B.06, and observe the violation of that
statute is a misdemeanor" and slapped a civil fine of $1000 on Barrett and his committee according to Barrett fined for false campaign flyer, ECM staff writer Derrick Knutson's article in the East Central Post Review:
The mailing, sent to voters in newly formed District 32B, among other
statements said that “Bob’s opponent didn’t serve on the Education
committee while a state senator even though our schools need help.”
In fact, Olseen served on the Senate’s Education Policy Committee from 2007-2008. . . .
Barrett was mild as a lamb about the fine when contacted by the ECM papers, Knutson reports:
A three-member panel of judges concluded Barrett and his team
prepared and disseminated false campaign material with reckless
disregard as to whether it was false.
Barrett learned of the panel’s findings Monday and expressed regret in an interview with the Times.
“They’re the experts,” he said. “I respect their decision and apologize to Mr. Olseen.” . . .
“I looked it up and didn’t see his membership, but obviously, according
to the judge, I should have,” Barrett told the Times. “It was an honest
mistake, and shouldn’t have happened…I remember looking and I remember
confirming that particular bullet point, and we were just wrong.” . . .
Earlier, his approach to the OAH panel was somewhat different: accusing Olseen of misusing public resources in filing the complaint (see embedded opinion below):
The Panel also finds troubling Representative Barrett’s suggestion that Mr. Olseen had improper motives in filing this campaign complaint and that he was “using public resources and this judicial process to obtain his personal goal.” Any individual has the right to file a complaint under the Fair Campaign Practices Act if they believe a person or committee has violated a provision of the Act. In this case, Mr. Olseen has established that Representative Barrett and his committee violated Minnesota Statutes § 211B.06 by disseminating false campaign material about him. Mr. Olseen’s complaint is grounded in law and fact and should not be viewed as an inappropriate use of public resources or this administrative process.
That's a good one from the candidate whose campaign couldn't even figure out how to use the very handy Minnesota Legislators Past & Present page kept by the cheerful and professional staff at the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library. It's the number two hit on a google keyword search for "Rick Olseen."
Fortunately, Olseen has a new job he's happy with, the papers report--and as a good government guy, he's thinking about the larger need to reform campaign practive law in Minnesota, he tells the ECM papers:
Olseen wonders how the mailing might have affected the voting Nov. 6,
though he is quick to add he is content position as a field
representative for U.S. Congressman Rick Nolan.
Barrett did not recall the document’s mailing list. If it was sizable
and even 1 percent of recipients changed their vote, Olseen said, it
may have been the tipping point in the election that came down to fewer
than 400 votes.
“I think it’s important that elected officials and candidates
understand there’s a responsibility on their part when they put
information out there that’s incorrect,” Olseen said Monday.
He also worries that the punishment is not strong enough to ensure those running for office stand behind all campaign material.
Photo:This meme was still popular when Rick Olseen served on the Senate Education Committee in 2007-2008 (above); Bob Barrett, R-Lindstrom (below), Present Master of Mad Innertube Research Skillz; Bluestem wants to the HRCC to raise funds by staging a research royal rumble on twitter featuring Barrett, Mary Franson, Glenn Gruenhagen, Cindy Pugh and Jim Newberger. Who would fish up the best misinformation?
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
In early discussions of the dynamics of the special election in House District 19A, party leaders and operatives on both sides fairly well dismissed the importance of the student vote, either because of traditional drop-off by student voters in non-Presidential elections--or because none of the candidates were connected to the campus as Terry Morrow and Ruth Johnson had been.
Fortunately, winning DFLer Clark Johnson, and GAC Democrats organizing powerhouse Megan Nelson didn't take the conventional wisdom seriously. The final major campaign event was a GOTV rally on the GAC campus with Congressman Tim Walz and Governor Mark Dayton.
Most recently [Johnson] held a “get out the vote” rally on the Gustavus
Adolphus campus. Gov. Mark Dayton and Congressman Tim Walz, D-Mankato,
turned out Monday to stump for Clark Johnson, rallying Gustavus students
in hopes that the campus vote would play a significant role Tuesday’s
election. . . .
In the past, Gustavus Adolphus students have lent a significant boost
to Democratic numbers in St. Peter’s Ward 2 precincts. But the highest
numbers of votes have coincided with either presidential elections or
elections in which a member of the Gustavus Adolphus staff have been
involved.
But Johnson was busy campaigning at Gustavus on
Monday, trying to reach out to students returning to classes. He praised
students for their participation in November’s general election and
tried to appeal to those who supported the “vote no” campaign by
advocating for the Legislature to legalize gay marriage. He told
students the Gustie vote would be integral in Tuesday night’s election.
In fact, votes from St. Peter’s Gustie-dominated Ward
2 totaled 450 accounting for nearly 17 percent of the winning vote.
More than 960 St. Peter residents voted for Johnson, contributing
significantly to his win.
Johnson won with 2,680 votes. Allen Quist received 1,801 votes, while Tim Gieseke collected 511.
The GAC factor parallels the importance of the student voter in the special election for Senate District 25 seat in 2008, won by Kevin Dahle. While student vote wasn't the only factor in both races, the two examples suggest that smart targeting and GOTV in districts where student voters live shouldn't be over looked in special elections.
Photo: Ruth and Clark Johnson campaign.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
Quist received 1801 votes, or 36.08 percent, while Independence Party candidate Tim Gieseke collected 511 votes for 10.24 percent of the vote.
The Republican's 2013 percentage of the vote in the state house district dipped slightly from the 37.05 percentage he received of the 2012 congressional election votes cast in the same house district. This suggests that the conservative Republican base that produces an Allen Quist in Nicollet County is fairly stable, with Gieseke capturing small-i independent voters.
Whatever the explanation, creationist Quist was defeated on Charles Darwin's birthday (as well as that of the Original Republican, Abraham Lincoln, although the Grand Old Party has--dare we say--evolved from the days of the Great Emancipator).
In today's other special election, Republican small business woman Tama Thies won with 55.08 percent of the vote with 15 of 16 precincts reporting when we posted at 10:30 p.m. Just as the 19A seat stayed in DFL hands, this traditionally Republican district in St. Cloud stayed Republican.
The results in both districts leave the party counts in the Minnesota House exactly as they were on the morning of November 7, 2012.
. . .Quist didn't talk much -- if at all -- about abortion, gay marriage or
other social issues during the campaign, but [North Mankato voter Jared] Glaser checked some of
Quist's former words and actions online. He saw videos that referenced
Quist's attempts in the 1980s to reduce the amount of anonymous gay sex
in Minnesota and his doubts about the theory of evolution, including
statements that dinosaurs and humans co-existed on earth.
"He just sounds like a lunatic," Glaser said. . . .
Cartoon: Allen Quist can still fly to the state capitol for gun hearings and such. Cartoon by Ken Avidor.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
On the eve of the special election in Minnesota House District 19A, the Allen Quist campaign is claiming the all-important Gustavus Adolphus vote.
Not the friendly ELCA-affiliated private college nestled on the west bank of the Minnesota River valley in St. Peter. Not that.
Instead, literature being distributed on campus depicts a dashing young Swedish king at the Battle of Breitenfeld (near present day Leipzig), an encounter widely viewed as the prelude to the Swedish phase of the Thirty Years War.
And as sure as Bluestem is that Adolphus isn't eligible to vote in Minnesota, even if he holds a valid GAC student ID (he's been dead since 1632 and there's that citizenship thingie), we're sure Thirty Years War is about as long as Mr. Quist has been campaigning, though without the original Gustie's success.
Right century though for Quist's beliefs, even though the stead might better be a dinosaur.
We remind voters in HD 19A to get out and vote on Tuesday, February 12, 2013, since he'd have to get permission to bring that horse to the capitol
Photo: Quist's college outreach literature, beyond camp.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
With the Legislature proposing several new gun control bills, Quist
has stepped forward to present himself as a strong opponent of the
bills, even traveling to one of the hearings as a show of support. He
said research by John Lott shows that control measures have no impact on
violence. Lott's research since publication has been discredited by
several scientific journals and it has even been accused of fabricating
its facts. He said attention needs to instead be focused on other areas,
such as the correlation between school shooters and violent video
games.
"We really need to see if we can do something about violent video games," said Quist, "They are a serious concern."
People don't kill people, video games do.
Quist certainly hasn't lost his touch since the days when he proposed instituting abstinence-based sex ed as a plan to lower crime. In the December 22, 1993, Star Tribune article, "Quist twist on crime mixes liberal tenets with conservative," Dane Smith reported:
The biggest causes behind the rising crime
rate, Quist emphasized, is "promiscuity" and a resulting explosion in
single-family parents over the past 10 years. One of his key proposals
is an "abstinence-based" sex education program in the schools. . . .(Nexis All-News, accessed 2/10/2013)
Bluestem's readers of coarse sensibilities can write their own jokes about the effects of video-game withdrawal in joyless young boys. We simply couldn't comment.
. . .Past studies have failed to demonstrate a link between violent games
and real violence, said Christopher Ferguson, an associate professor of
psychology and communications at Texas A&M International University
in Laredo, Texas. Policy makers should focus on more important issues
including gun control and mental health, he said in an interview.
“We can’t find any evidence to support
this idea that exposure to video-game violence contributes in any way
to support the idea that these types of games or movies or TV shows are a
contributing factor,” Ferguson said. “It doesn’t need to be studied
again.”
Other news venues filed more nuanced accounts. On January 17, Suzy Khimm of the Washington Post WonkBlog wrote in POW! CRACK! What we know about video games and violence that Ferguson pointed out that "“video games have become more popular and more violent, while youth violence has declined.”
There's more:
But though there’s been a wide range of academic research on the
subject, there’s little to no conclusive evidence that playing video
games results in real-life violence, much less criminal acts. In 2011,
the Supreme Court struck down a California law restricting the sale and rental of violent video games to minors in a 7-2 ruling. The majority cited the state of existing research in its opinion:
Psychological studies purporting to show a connection
between exposure to violent video games and harmful effects on children
do not prove that such exposure causes minors to act aggressively. Any
demonstrated effects are both small and indistinguishable from effects
produced by other media…California also cannot show that the Act’s
restrictions meet the alleged substantial need of parents who wish to
restrict their children’s access to violent videos.
. . .In one 2012 article
for the Journal of Psychiatric Research, Ferguson and his co-authors
examined 165 participants over three years and found that playing
violent video games was not linked to youth aggression or dating
violence. Instead, they found that “depression, antisocial personality
traits, exposure to family violence and peer influences were the best
predictors of aggression-related outcomes.”
That said, there is evidence that violent video games may have a
tendency to make children who are already aggressive more hostile and
more aggressive — at least in the context of playing a video game,
Ferguson explains. “Openly aggressive children tend to intensify their
preference for games with a brutal and bloody plot over time,”
researchers wrote in a 2011 article for Media Psychology that examined 324 German grade-schoolers over one year. Ferguson points to another 2011 study
from the American Psychological Association that found that video games
were linked to aggression but not for the reasons you might expect. “It
appears that competition, not violence, may be the video game
characteristic that has the greatest influence on aggressive behavior,”
the researchers conclude. .. .
And there's this, also from January from MSN Video game makers urge Biden not to blame games for real violence:
The letters from the International Game Developers Association and the Entertainment Consumers Associationpointed
out that numerous studies have already been done showing that there
is no causal link between game violence and real violence.
"In
2011, video game sales increased to over $27 billion dollars and
violent crimes nationwide decreased 3.8 percent from 2010," Mercurio
wrote, pointing to the FBI's own statistics. "Since
2002, violent crime has decreased 15.5 percent. This is all during the
time when games like 'Call of Duty' and 'Halo' have dominated sales."
But
the letter from Greenberg, of the International Game
Developers Association, supported the idea of additional studies
about video games.
"Unlike some industry groups, the IGDA
does not seek to impede more scientific study about our members’
products. We welcome more evidence-based research into the effects of
our work," he wrote, but added: "We ask that any new government
research look at the totality of imaginary violence. Instead of simply
trying to find negative effects, we ask that any new research explore
the benefits of violent video games, too."
So perhaps we could violate the Constitution when it comes to video games. Bluestem suspects that our gamer friends would no more part with their "Call of Duty" games than Representative Cornish would surrender his coyote rifle.
Read the rest of Moniz's article at the New Ulm Journal.
The Minnesota House District 19A special election is Tuesday, February 12; the district in
Photo: Found on the Facebook page of Minnesota State University -- Mankato political science professor Joe Kunkel, these two literature pieces appear to be time travelers from the campaigns of Quist and DFL candidate Clark Johnson from the 1980s (they ran for different seats under earlier districting and never faced off against each other before). Bluestem is unable to verify the historical veracity of the facial hair on either gentleman. The lit pieces--and the beards--are for real and featured in Mankato Free Press political reporter Mark Fischenich's Campaign Notebook: Special election hits the home stretch. Much wonderfulness in the article. Go read it.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
About $11,000--a fraction of the estimated $70,000 the primary and special elections will cost county and township governments--remains in Morrow's campaign treasury.
Dayton, Walz, Clark Johnson GOTV rally Monday
Baring blocked roads and blizzard conditions, Governor Mark Dayton and Congressman Tim Walz will stump for DFL endorsee Clark Johnson at Gustavus Adolphus College's Alumni Hall in St. Peter on Monday, February 11 at 5 p.m., the St Peter Herald reports in Rally for Clark Johnson to be held at Gustavus.
New Ulm Journal: Forums and fundraising
The candidates have met in one public forum and one two-day radio debate. Josh Moniz covers the wide-range of questions at the former in 19A candidates offer diverse, divided views. Go check it out at the New Ulm Journal.
The Journal also checked out the campaign money chase in 19A fundraising reports show divergent campaign emphasis. Johnson and Quist are nearly evenly matched in the dollar game but are spending their cash in much different ways. Read how in the Journal.
Since Moniz turned in that report, Clark Johnson's committee has taken in $2000 more in large donations, all from terminating DFL committees; the old SD 23 DFL and Linda Pfeilsticker's 2008 state house campaign each gave $500 and former DFL rival Karl Johnson's committee ccontributed $1000. SEIU's MN state council endorsed Johnson today, so it's possible an addition contribution will be posted.
None of the other candidates report new large contributions.
The story started on Friday, with Charley Shaw's dramatically-titled article, Sand storm heads toward Capitol, in which readers learned that Red Wing Mayor Dennis Egan, a lobbyist by profession, had been hired by the new Minnesota Industrial Sand Council, a part of the well-established Aggregate & Ready Mix Association of
Minnesota.
. . . Red Wing City Council President Lisa Bayley, a lawyer, said she has
received many "complaints, questions and concerns'' from residents about
the mayor's new job as a paid advocate for an industry that is at the
forefront of local ferment. . . .
. . .Egan's decision also occurs as debate rages up and down the
Mississippi River corridor over the sand boom. In the past four years,
more than 100 mines and processing facilities have been permitted in
Wisconsin and Minnesota in a rush largely controlled by local units of
government.
Bayley said the council will discuss the matter Monday at a regularly scheduled meeting.
"If the facts are as we think they are, it could prove to be a very serious matter,'' she said, declining to elaborate.
Forty-seven comments have been left on the online story, which ran on A1 above the fold in the print section on Wednesday. The comments are overwhelmingly negative toward the mayor's actions.
Dennis Egan, the City Council and the citizens of Red Wing certainly have some things to work out.
Egan might decide that being Mayor of Fracsandville isn't worth the wages for the consternation he's causing those who elected him Mayor of Red Wing--and he could resign as Executive Director of MISC.
A third option: take the sand and run, resigning as Red Wing mayor.
It might be that everything is resolved and the city attorney returns an opinion that all is a-okay, and Red Wing's voters agree.
But, if the council discovers cause for removal--or the residents say enough is enough--what options remain?
The City of Red Wing charter is online, and that document outlines the process for removal and recall.
Remain, Removal or Recall?
Red Wing's City Charter is online here. It's possible that the Red City Council could remove the mayor from office on a two-thirds vote if it found cause after following the process in the city charter:
Section 2.05 Removal
Every elected officer may be removed from this office by vote of two-thirds of the City Council, provided that such official shall not be removed except for cause, after having been furnished with a written statement of the reasons therefore and after being given a reasonable opportunity to be heard in his/her defense. The City Council shall fix a date for a hearing on such charges not less than ten (10) days after notice to the accused officeholder and shall have authority to compel the attendance of witnesses and to request any necessary records and papers. In the event the office holder neglects to appear to answer the charges or the City Council finds that the charges are sustained and provide sufficient cause for removal, it may, by two-thirds vote, declare the office vacant. Nothing contained inthis section shall preclude the Council from establishing by ordinance criteria whereby an elected official who is absent from a prescribed number of meetings is deemed to have resigned.
If Red Wing remains angered, Egan doesn't quit his new job, resign as mayor or the council doesn't remove him, citzens still have recourse to a recall election if they're not happy with Egan's arrangements.
The City Charter allows for recall in Chapter 6. Here are the relevant sections about recall committees and petitions:
Recall
Section 6.13 The Recall
Any five registered voters may form themselves into a committee for the purpose of bringing about the
recall of any elected officer of the City. In the case of the Mayor and Council Member At Large, the
committee may be composed of registered voters from any ward of the City. In the case of all other
Council Members the committee shall consist of registered voters from the ward or wards in which
said Council Member is elected. The committee shall certify to the clerical officer the name of the
officer whose removal is sought, a statement of the grounds for removal in not more than 250 words,
and their intention to bring about this recall. A copy of this certification shall be attached to each
signature paper, and no signature paper shall be put into circulation previous to such certification.
Section 6.14 Recall Petitions
The petition for the recall of any official shall consist of a certificate identical with that filed with the
clerical officer together with all the signature papers and affidavits thereto attached. The recall petition
shall be in a form prescribed by and available from the clerical officer.
Section 6.15 Filing of Petition
Within thirty (30) days after the filing of the original certificate, the committee shall file the completed
petition in the office of the clerical officer. The clerical officer shall examine the petition within five (5)
days, and if he/she finds it irregular in any way, or finds that in the case of Council Members elected
by ward or wards that petitioners are not registered in the ward or wards said Council Member is
elected from, or finds that the number of signers is less than twenty percent (20%) of the registered
voters of the City or of the ward or wards said Council Member is elected from, he/she shall so notify
the committee.
The committee shall then be given ten (10) days in which to file additional signature papers and to
correct the petition in all other respects, but they may not change the statement of the grounds upon
which the recall is sought. If at the end of that time the clerical officer finds the petition still insufficient
or irregular, he/she shall notify the committee to that effect and shall file the petition in his/her office.
No further action shall be taken thereon. The final finding of the insufficiency or irregularity of a
petition shall not prejudice the filing of a new petition for the same purpose.
So, how many registered voters are there in Red Wing, Minnesota? According to the election results for the City of Red Wing in the 2012 general election, that's 9443 voters as of 7AM on Election Day (pdf here: RedWingVoters 2012).
Twenty percent of the registered voter works out to 1888.6 people--or about 1900 people. Note that these folks can't be any old person who signs a petition, or even any resident of Red Wing. They must be registered voters.
Granted, Minnesotans can register with ease, but the bar is fairly high here. How high is the outrage factor for Red Wing's voters? Egan received 5804 votes cast in the mayor's race, or 73.52 percent. The voters didn't know--and it's probable that he didn't know--that he'd be starting a new job as Executive Director of the Minnesota Industrial Sand Council on February 1, 2013.
Screenshot: Dennis Egan's Facebook page on Tuesday, February 5. Note that he's "from" Red Wing but "lives" in St. Paul. What sort of message is that from a mayor.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
Minnesota media mogul Stan Hubbard, who has written big checks to
Crossroads and other conservative groups, said the GOP has had too many
candidates who are “nut cases” and pledged to donate and raise money for
Conservative Victory Project.
“Some areas obviously are more conservative in their constituencies
than others,” Hubbard said. “But I don’t think anybody anywhere with any
sense is going to want to elect a candidate who says, ‘If your daughter
gets raped, it’s God’s will’,”
he said, referring to Richard Mourdock, who defeated incumbent Sen.
Dick Lugar of Indiana in the 2012 GOP primary only to lose the general
election after suggesting that “God intended” pregnancies occurring from
rape. “I mean, give me a break, will you?” Hubbard said.
So who is Hubbard funding locally, however much he's seen the light about post-moronic rape malarky?
Regardless of the headline, it's not Minnesota's Tea Party candidates for whom Hubbard won't be bringing the bread.
And as far as Fifty Shades of Cray goes, Hubbard's funding some doozies. There's the ever-chatty Mary Franson, who recently cited discredited theories linking autism and vaccines. From the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board individual contribution database under "Hubbard, Stanley":
Perhaps Hubbard is thinking of North Star Tea Party co-founder, Representative Cindy Pugh. His name is absent from her campaign finance reports.
One conservative source suggested that the headline itself is misleading, and Hubbard isn't objecting to the Tea Party, so much as the Ron Paul faction in the Republican Party of Minnesota.
However, Bluestem suspects buyer's remorse in the comment about Mourdock. A little over a year ago, Hubbard gave Hoosiers for Mourdock $1000, as did his spouse.
With the special election to fill former state representative Terry Morrow's seat in Minnesota House District 19A just over a week away, the pace is picking up.
To view side-by-side comparisons of the candidates' unedited answers to thoughtful questions developed by GMG, click on the link above, then check the boxses beside the candidates' names. To view a candidate's biographic information, click on the "bio" link to the right of their name.
DFLer Clark Johnson, IP candidate Tim Gieseke and Republican nominee Allen Quist will meet for a forum in St. Peter on Tuesday, February 5, 7:30-9:30 p.m. at the Treaty Site History Center, 1851 North Minnesota Ave (Highway 169). The event, which is free and open to the public, is sponsored by Greater Mankato Growth, the St. Peter Chamber of Commerce and the St. Peter League of Women Voters.
. . .Our two-day candidate forum will be held during Talk of the Town at 1:05pm on Thursday and Friday Febuary 7 and 8. . . .
We welcome your questions.
You can email your candidate questions to news@ktoe.com ... be sure to
include your name... and we will select several listener questions for
each of the three candidates. . .
While it's been difficult for voters to find detailed answers from the candidates, that problem should be solved by the questionnaires and forums. Show up or listen if you want to witness Allen Quist release the Lion of Free Enterprise or whatever it's call these days.
Photo: Clark Johnson and supporters in St. Peter. Former state rep. Ruth Johnson is the woman wearing the fabulous scarf (first left).
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
Dorsher’s seven years of St. Cloud school board experience best
positions her to succeed. She started there when the school board
struggled with dysfunction and division. Her communication skills helped
overcome that while also addressing budget cuts, building closures,
excess levy referendums and enrollment changes. . . .
As for perspective, Dorsher stands out as the candidate best suited
to represent the broad array of voters in this district, which covers
south and west St. Cloud, Waite Park and St. Augusta.
The
DFLer mostly favors Gov. Mark Dayton’s budget proposal, but she also
stressed the importance of low taxes, creating a good business
environment and examining ways to improve state services.
Theis
speaks for only one voice — business owners. Granted, that is an
important constituency, but most District 14A residents aren’t part of
that circle.
McKee might be the most fiscally conservative, but he lacks perspective on the realities of state government. . . .
Read the whole endorsement at the Times. The editorial notes that Dorsher should resist her "DFL advisers’ penchant for control." Sound advice, indeed.
Although Bluestem anticipates that our conservative blogging brethren will begin to pout about "liberal media bias," the St. Cloud Times doesn't hasn't had an inclination to recommend DFLers in this particular district.
The editorial board endorsed Gottwalt and the other two Republicans running in for the legislature in 2012; it endorsed Gottwalt in 2010 ("EDITORIAL: Hentges, Gottwalt, Banaian in District 15,' St. Cloud Times, October 19, 2010, Nexis All-News, accessed 2/3/2013) 2008 ("15A, 15B incumbents should get 2nd terms," St. Cloud Times, October 15, 2008, Nexis All-News, accessed 2/3/2013) and 2006 (Randy Krebs, "Gottwalt, Haws, Clark best choices in strong field," St. Cloud Times, October 22, 2006, Nexis All-News, accessed 2/3/2013).
In 2004, the paper endorsed incumbent Jim Knoblach (Randy Krebs, "Knoblach should be in District 15A hot seat," October 25, 2004, Nexis All-News, accessed 2/3/2013). Bluestem had to go back to 2002 to find an endorsement of a DFL candidate for this seat by the Times (Rand Krebs, "Kostreba has priorities in right order to lead 15A," St. Cloud Times, October 20, 2002, Nexis All-News, accessed 2/3/2013).
Before last year's redistricting, the area was numbered Senate District 15.
To read more about the HD 14A candidates' positions, check out Times' staff writer's Ben Katzner's coverage of yesterday's League of Women Voters' candidate forum, 14A candidates address issues
Special elections will be held in Minnesota House Districts 14A and 19A on February 12.
The ever-sharpeyed MNA New Journalist of the Year Josh Moniz just tweeted a curious observation about a press release that the Republican Party of Minnesota sent out scolding DFL voters for selecting endorsed Democratic candidate Clark Johnson in yesterday's primary for the February 12 HD 19A special election.
The Republicans didn't mention the name of their own candidate, Allen Quist.
The candidate whose campaign has had the benefit of not just one, but two fundraising emails from the extreme Gentlewoman from Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District, Michele Bachmann.
Jan 29, 2013Voters in House District 19A Deserve More Than a Rubber Stamp for the Dayton Agenda
St. Paul - Republican
Party of Minnesota Chairman Pat Shortridge issued the following
statement regarding the DFL primary win by Clark Johnson in House
District 19A:
“Governor Dayton and the Twin Cities’ liberals who run the
Minnesota House of Representatives have proposed huge new taxes hikes to
pay for big increases in government spending. They are proposing new
environmental regulations that will severely hamper Minnesota
agriculture. They have already begun putting into place the ObamaCare
health insurance exchange.
We're not sure what "new environmental regulations that will severely hamper Minnesota agriculture" have been introduced in the Minnesota House. (Instead, the sort of one-sided partisan whining chronicled in House ag chairs put their heads together as Hamilton sour grapes whine tasting continues is going on. Do they mean the new drainage legislation that Rod Hamilton is a co-author of? Or are they just picking empty template out of their--ahem--coffee cups at MNGOP headquarters in St. Paul?
“Now that the field is set for the special election in House
District 19A, the question is: Do voters in Nicollet, Blue Earth and Le
Sueur Counties want a rubber stamp for this extreme agenda? Or do they
want a representative who will try to stop it and offer better solutions
based on tried and true principles?
“Voters in House District 19A have a chance to send St. Paul a loud
and clear message: Focus on economic growth and job creation instead of
passing job-killing tax hikes. Stop trying to have government direct
our economy. Stop rewarding special interest groups. Stop pandering to
liberal environmentalists who would do harm to our agriculture economy.
Yes, kids: instead vote for our extreme agenda and our candidate. But we're so not telling you his name.
Even though, unlike the phantom environmental menace the MNGOP is evoking to scare the tar out of you, he actually has a name, and it's Allen Quist. Voters in 19A may remember rejecting him in 2012 when he ran against Congressman Walz.
Only 37 percent of November's voters in HD19A voted for Quist--and it's his home turf.
“Voters in House District 19A deserve a Representative that
reflects the values of the district - responsible spending, efficient
government, and a focus on job creation. They don’t need a rubber stamp
for an extreme agenda in St Paul. On February 12, they can send a
powerful message to Mark Dayton and Paul Thissen.”
Nope, voters don't need a rubber stamp for an extreme agenda, and they can send a pwoerful message that they're sick of this rhetorical hogwash by voting for local college professor and advisor Clark Johnson.
Cartoon: Allen Quist, the Republican Party of Minnesota's Love That Dare Not Say Its Name.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
With only the drafty notion of Minnesota Senate Minority Leader David "Yertle the Turtle" Hann at hand, the state's political junkies are scouring the land looking for signs that there will be some sort of gubernatorial race when Mark Dayton comes up again in 2014.
Dayton won a squeaker of a race against Tom Emmer and Tom Horner. One opponent ventured into talk radio. Yesterday, the other 2010 contender went to St. Peter.
In other 19A news, 2010 Independence Party gubernatorial candidate
Tom Horner spoke on behalf of Gieseke at an Independence Party
fundraiser in St. Peter.
Horner addressed a crowd of approximately 20 people . . .
Horner did not
rule out a 2014 run for governor, but said he needs to see the ability
to raise serious money early in the campaign. He said an Independence
candidate must define himself or herself early and move into at least
second place to avoid fears of wasted votes as DFL and Republicans pull
apart on positions. He said he is not interested in being the "Don
Quixote of ideas."
That's at least a bit more decisive than Erik Paulsen's tepid answers about potentially challenging Franken for U.S. Senate.
Photo: 2010 IP standard-bearer Tom Horner so doesn't want to be the Man of La Mancha.
If you enjoyed reading this post, consider giving a donation via paypal:
All of the statements, opinions, and views expressed on this site by Sally Jo Sorensen are solely her own, save when she attributes them to other sources.
The opinions, statements, and views of contributing writers are their own.
Sorensen, editor and proprietor of Bluestem Prairie, served as a New Media training and strategy consultant for the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party from October 2009 through mid-April 2010. She now serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors.
Recent Comments