Tuesday morning news digest: Herds of politicians edition

Welcome Townhall Readers!   We're flattered that the NRCC's Notroots care enough to visit.  If you want to respond to Jason Bauman's comments about stem cell research that are cited below, please go take a look at his blog, too! 

Mankato Free Press: Herds of Pols
The Mankato Free Press reports that Farmfest will host herd of pols, highlighting today's Feature Forum on the Farm Bill at 10:30.  We'll miss this morning's events, but hope to make it to the global warming forum in the afternoon. The Free Press is also pleased with Congress's new ethics bill.

We'll have our watermelon iced for the DFL corn feed fundraiser later on in the day.

New Ulm Journal: Hope springs eternal
Speaking of fundraisers, The New Ulm Journal took in the Republican First District  hopefuls stop in Sleepy Eye. First up at the Brown County GOP Fun Raiser (oh boy!) was State Senator Dick Day:

Minnesota Senate Minority Leader Dick Day of Owatonna said the Republican effort to unseat Democratic Congressman Tim Walz will be challenging.

“It’ll be a tough battle. We’ll do it the old-fashioned way, earning respect by going to parades and other events, shaking hands and talking to people,” Day explained.

Okay then.  Those who want to know how that's going can check out Evil Bobby's videos. Next up, Lake Crystal School Board member Mark Meyer, who warns against Tim Walz's Secret Plan for Health Care:

“The Democrats want to bring European Socialism to this country. They’re not stupid, just wrong. Socialized medicine is bad for medicine and people,” Meyer explained.

Actually, we were under the impression that Walz was seeking the advice of the First District's medical community when it came to health care issues, or so it seemed at the Economic Summit in Austin last month. Either we missed the European Socialist panel or medical panel moderator Mayo Clinic CEO Glenn Forbes was a really sneaky guy.

Mayo cancer doc Brian Davis came out with his views:

Mayo Clinic cancer physician Brian Davis said he was committed to conservative values like protecting life, stem cell research, no same-sex marriages, securing our borders and remaining offensive in the Global War on Terror.

“You don’t need to destroy a human embryo to do stem cell research,” Davis explained.

This is interesting. Brian J. Davis was in Walz's DC office in April on behalf of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology & Oncology(ASTRO) to discuss Walz's position about stem cell research when he told Walz of his potential plans to challenge him in 2008, according to the Rochester Post Bulletin.  The Cancer Leadership Council includes ASTRO among supporters of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. 

UPDATE, August 16, 2007: Dr. Davis answered our questions below at Blonde Sagacity. Thanks. 

Since the Post Bulletin has put the original archive behind a subscription archives, as is the newspaper's practice, here's an excerpt from the Frontrunner so readers coming in from Blonde Sagacity can get a taste of the original source.   

The material the Frontrunner quotes from the PB suggests that Dr. Davis should ask his local paper   to print a correction, since it reported that Davis was there to discuss "the congressman's positions on stem cell research and other medical issues."

The Rochester (MO) Post-Bulletin (5/18, Felker) reports, "Radiation oncologist Brian J. Davis   of Rochester in late April concluded a Washington lobbying meeting" with Rep. Tim Walz (D) "with the news that he might seek the Republican nomination to run against him," Walz and Davis confirmed Thursday. Davis, a researcher at the Mayo Clinic, requested a meeting with Walz in his Capitol Hill office on April 24 "as a representative of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiation and Oncology" to discuss "the congressman's positions on stem cell research and other medical issues." At the end of the discussion, Davis told Walz that he "was close to filing a candidate declaration with the Federal Election Commission." However, Walz's spokeswoman Meredith Salsbery said the congressman "cannot by law use his congressional office to campaign." Davis, meanwhile, "said he contacted the Federal Election Commission after the trip and secured an opinion that none of his activities qualified as campaigning since he is not a declared candidate."

[end update]

Months later update (11/4): Davis has clarified the FEC information in a post at his candidate blog (visit via IDHA). Once he declared in his candidacy, the April trip was charged to his campaign.[end update]

UPDATE #2: August 18] Jason Bauman at IDHA  takes a close look at Dr. Davis's answers.  Here's the post:

Recent news concerning Dr. Brian Davis of the Mayo Clinic has caused me to write.  Ollie from Bluestem caused quite a stir with the conservative author at “Blonde Sagacity.” Apparently it was enough of a stir to get Dr. Brian Davis to answer Ollie’s questions on the (not surprising) conservative blog.

The posts are related to Dr. Brian Davis view on embryonic stem cell research and his ties with the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology & Oncology (ASTRO). Ollie writes:

“Mayo cancer doc Brian Davis came out with his views:

Mayo Clinic cancer physician Brian Davis said he was committed to conservative values like protecting life, stem cell research, no same-sex marriages, securing our borders and remaining offensive in the Global War on Terror.

“You don’t need to  destroy a human embryo to do stem cell research,” Davis explained.

This is interesting. Brian J. Davis was in Walz’s DC office in April on behalf of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology & Oncology(ASTRO) to discuss Walz’s position about stem cell when he told Walz of his potential plans to challenge him in 2008, according to the Rochester Post Bulletin. The Cancer Leadership Council includes ASTRO among supporters of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act.

Will Davis continue to be active in an organization that supports legislation to expand embryonic stem cell research? We’re curious if he shared ASTRO’s agenda with New Ulm’s GOP funsters, or confided his opposition to embryonic stem cell research with Congressman Walz back in April while lobbying on behalf of ASTRO.”

Dr. Brian Davis answers these questions on the conservative blog:

1. Will Davis continue to be active in an organization that supports legislation to expand embryonic stem cell research?

Yes, I anticipate remaining active in this organization. While I may take issue with ASTRO’s stance on this particular issue, I remain supportive of the broader aims of the organization as they relate to providing quality cancer care to our patients and supporting cancer research.

2. We’re curious if he shared ASTRO’s agenda with New Ulm’s GOP funsters.

No, this was not a topic of discussion at the meeting in Sleepy Eye, Minnesota with the group from New Ulm and elsewhere.

3. Did Davis confide his opposition to embryonic stem cell research with Congressman Walz back in April while lobbying on behalf of ASTRO?

No, our discussions were focused primarily on the specific legislative agenda of ASTRO’s at that time. This agenda did not include any references to embryonic stem cell research. Nonetheless, Congressman Walz shared some of his views on embryonic stem cell research but did not inquire about mine. Consequently, I did not take the time to relate my personal views to him on this matter.

As a representative for ASTRO, Dr. Brian Davis should fully support measures that were passed as part of the organization’s legislative agenda. I keep thinking about how MSUSA students advocate for 0% tuition because we voted for this wording in our own agenda. When visiting with legislators, we are bound by our representation of MSUSA and the students to push a 0% tuition increase, not go there on our own and say we don’t personally care if tuition is increased. Dr. Brian Davis stated, “Consequently, I did not take the time to relate my personal views to him on this matter” referring to embryonic stem-cell research. If I was meeting with a legislator (or in his case, a congressman!) and they told me their stance on tuition, would I not take the time to advocate for my organization’s view… especially if I am there on behalf of the organization? Apparently if I didn’t feel strongly enough, I could ignore it. He pushed aside his trip to represent his organization, to represent himself instead. This is evidenced by his hinting of running against Walz.

The second statement that concerned me was his view on embryonic stem-cell research. Ollie quoted him saying, “You don’t need to destroy a human embryo to do stem cell research.” As a medical professional and person that people look up to, I am astonished that his personal bias goes beyond sound medical research. As a doctor, I respect him greatly for his work. I work with great doctors that excel in their practice. As a candidate for Walz’s seat, I criticize his belief that embryonic stem-cell research is the destruction of life. It is saving lives from soon-to-be-already-destroyed embryos! The American Medical Association, the organization that physicians are members of supports fully-funded embryonic stem-cell research. What is Dr. Brian Davis trying to prove when he doesn’t follow what research papers, organizations that he’s a part of, and many of his republican colleagues all agree on?

Just a quick paragraph from my 10-page research paper entitled, “Stem Cell Research: The Morality Policy and What Nurses Can Do”:

The authors, along with many organizations from the scientific community like  the American Academy of Neurology and the American Medical Association show a congruent trend toward fully funding stem-cell research. Discussions are made on the ethics and how current restrictions limit research, slowing progression toward useful treatments. There were similar guidelines put forth among the articles that suggest new ways of ethically advocating stem-cell research (McCloskey, 2002; Okie, 2005). These guidelines tended toward stem-cell advocates and still the moral policy of opponents is challenged. The Committee on the Biological and Biomedical Applications of Stem Cell Research was quoted on a number of occasions suggesting recommendations to move forward with the vast potential stem-cell research has (McCloskey, 2002). The committee suggested that life is not being taken away from stem-cell research, and that stem-cell lines are from embryos already going to be destroyed. Opponents still hold their moral convictions despite the ethical bargaining of the committee.

Sources and great reads:

Cedar, S.H. (2006). Stem cell and related therapies: Nurses and midwives
     representing all parties. Nursing Ethics, 13(3), 292-303.

Ennen, K. (2001). Shaping the future of practice through political
     activity: How nurses can influence health care policy. AAOHN
     Journal, 49(12), 557-569.

McCloskey, B. (2002). The controversy surrounding stem cell research.
     Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice, 3(1), 4-13.

National Institutes of Health (2006). Federal Policy
     [Stem Cell Information]. Retrieved

November 11, 2006

from
     Web site: http://stemcells.nih.gov/policy/defaultpage.asp

Okie, S. (2005). Stem-cell research: Signposts and roadblocks. The
    

New  England

Journal of Medicine, 353(1), 1-5.

Schwartz, R. S. (2006). The politics and promise of stem-cell research.
     The

New  England

Journal of Medicine, 355(12), 1189-1191.

Townhallers and Notroots-- the above excerpt  is from IDHA.  Go visit that blog too.  They'd love the traffic! [end of update #2]

Will Davis continue to be active in an organization that supports legislation to expand embryonic stem cell research?  We're curious if he shared ASTRO's agenda with New Ulm's GOP funsters, or confided his opposition to embryonic stem cell research with Congressman Walz back in April while lobbying on behalf of ASTRO. 

Somehow, Randy Demmer ended up at the bottom of the article:

Hayfield businessman/corn and soybean farmer and 3-term Dist. 29A Rep. Randy Demmer of Hayfield called for fiscal responsibility and lower taxes so private businesses can flourish.

Demmer will be at Farmfest today, according to his website. If you visit the Demmer website, take the poll.  Seems like most people stopping by before  9:00 a.m. today think immigration is the biggest issue facing the First, while not one worries about transportation issues.

Winona Daily News editorial: Minnesota's roads and bridges: When, not if
That doesn't seem to be the mainstream if we are to believe the Strib's report about today's special election, the Owatonna People's Press's article Transportation funding a priority for now, a Rochester Post Bulletion editorial or today's editorial page of the Winona Daily News.

Today's WDN editorial, Minnesota's roads and bridges: When, not if, recalls the paper's constant call for better transportation funding.  The staff minces no words:

“But will it take a bridge falling apart with motorists on it to get us to realize the state has needs, not just wants?”

— Winona Daily News editorial, Dec. 31, 2006

Tragically, it might have been a matter of when, not if. And there is absolutely no joy, no gloating in “We told you so.”

In the inevitable rush to find out what caused Wednesday’s catastrophic Interstate 35W bridge failure, there’s a lot of finger pointing, a lot of talk about inspections and a lot of grief for those who were injured or lost their life.

And now, with the television cameras turned on and the nation watching, Gov. Tim Pawlenty decides he might finally support a gas tax increase. This change of heart is well-timed at best for a man who refused such an increase twice recently.

It’s a shame that it took a disaster of this magnitude to change the governor’s mind. What’s even worse is the time Minnesota has lost by not properly funding roads and bridges. Even a modest increase in the tax (which hasn’t been raised since 1988) will not fund all the state’s needs.

Right here in Winona, our interstate bridge got low marks and is years away from being replaced. The scary thing is that there are other bridges in worse condition, others that probably remain more of a safety hazard.

The refrain we’ve been hearing for years is that we need to cut taxes, yet no one would say this bridge disaster was worth the pennies saved.

Go read the rest at the WDN.