That skepticism comes as the status of the private company that had been pushing the project is unclear. The North American High Speed Rail Group had been leading the charge to do something never before done in America — privately fund a high-speed rail line.The company estimated the $4.2 billion rail line could make the trip from Rochester to Bloomington within 29 minutes.
But questions are swirling as to what has happened to the ail group. Visitors to North American High Speed Rail Group's website are instead referred to a website for "Minnesota Corridor." Wendy Meadley, who served as the rail group's chief strategy officer, states on her LinkedIn page that she left the company in October. She also terminated her status as a lobbyist for the rail group on Nov. 2, according to the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board.
Meadley declined a request for comment.
Records show that Meadley purchased the web domain name for Minnesota Corridor — mnhsr.com. Meanwhile, Joseph Wang's LinkedIn page still lists him as chairman and CEO of the North American High Speed Rail Group. Wang could not be reached for comment.
Minnesota Department of Transportation spokesman Kevin Gutknecht said the agency has not heard from the rail group or "anyone on a related topic for a number of months."
This lack of activity might encourage some to suggest that proposed legislation should be dropped as does one Rochester Republican, Carlson reports:
Some fellow Republican lawmakers are speaking out against the legislation — not because of what is in the bill but because they do not believe the high-speed rail project is going to happen.
"It seems like a waste of energy. It's probably great for voters in their districts. I just don't see it having any real impact," said Rep. Nels Pierson, R-Rochester.
Opponents of the proposed high-speed rail line are also left wondering what happened to the rail group. Heather Arndt, co-chairwoman of Citizens Concerned About Rail, said it has been nearly a year since she talked to Meadley. Despite the uncertainty surrounding the private company, she said it is important rail opponents keep up the fight.
"Until it's good, dead, buried and six feet under, we're staying engaged," Arndt said. "We're continuing to work with elected officials at all levels and stay engaged and watch it. These are our homes and our communities and businesses and we are not going to walk away from it while it could still come back around."
Sound strategy, given the fact that this zombie project has yet to experience clear head shot. Since first learning about concerns about the project from Minnesota Farmers Union members while serving as a member of the group's policy committee, this seemed like a "flyover" project that positioned convenience over local landowners and communities needs and rights.
Read about the legislation against the project in the Post Bulletin article.
Image: Marge Simpson found the passenger rail project office in the cartoon series. It's been a bit harder pinning down the folks behind the southeastern Minnesota private rail project.
JANUARY FUNDRAISING DRIVE
Please donate! If you enjoy Bluestem's take on the news--and our investigative blogging--please consider throwing some spare change into our paypal account during our January contribution drive. Bluestem relies on reader contributions to continue publishing.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen@gmail.com as recipient.
The announcement of Minnesota House Committees reveals that Jeff Backer, R-Browns Valley, may actually find cause to kick Jean Wagenius, DFL-Minneapolis, around again. Both will serve on the 2017-2018 Environment and Natural Resources Policy and Finance Committee together.
Not that he ever needed anything beyond his loathing of cities to flog that place-baiting blither against the long-serving lawmaker.
When she was removed from the environmental committee--former minority leader Thissen wanted her on the committee as minority lead--the action seemed punitive to many observers.
Nonetheless, Republicans like Jeff Backer--now our state representative in Minnesota's lovely western boundary waters--choose to campaign against Wagenius. Quite astonishingly, he and his supporters continued to base his campaign rhetoric in 2016 against her, telling voters that she was responsible for the 2015 and 2016 buffer bills that she neither authored, co-authored, nor voted for.
Apparently, the Speaker must have noticed that the beef was getting a bit off after two years, so Wagenius is back on the committee, although South St. Paul Democrat Rick Hansen remains as minority lead. Hansen, a former Minnesota Department of Ag employee with degrees in biology and soil science, inherited his family's Fillmore County farm, which makes him as evil a metro guy as they come.
Dan Fabian, R-Roseau is newly chairing the committee after Denny McNamara retired. If bluster and manure worked for Trump, surely the Roseau Republican's tendency to grow red in the face when angry will survive the new hi-def reality of committee hearings.
If nincompoopery for the sake of the agri-chemical industrial complex has a face, it won't be Fabian's but rather that of Jeff Backer. We're purchasing five months' worth of corn to pop as the Republican chucklehead starts the trolling with Wagenius back on the committee.
Photo: Jean Wagenius, evil metro phantom menace. And she's a girl.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Various explanations have emerged for the outcome of the recent Minnesota legislative elections, which saw Republicans maintain their House majority and gain back the Senate. One popular explanation is that a flawed presidential candidate depressed turnout on the Democratic side.
But another factor is being offered by Republicans as a partial explanation, at least with respect to House races: the power of digital data. . . .
Golnik acknowledged that the HRCC has access to i360’s consumer data mine but that “average users” — including candidates — do not. “That’s used at a higher level when we are doing our mail programs and our cables buys,” Golnik said. “I would use that on the independent expenditures side.” . . .
Daudt did not directly answer a question about the HRCC’s costs for its i360 digital infrastructure. “It’s not necessarily expensive,” he said. “It’s just a matter of changing people’s minds that we need to do things differently.”
Bluestem thought that the question about "the HRCC's cost for its i360 digital infrastructure" would be easy to answer by going to the committee's 2015 and 2016 state campaign finance reports and reading how much the Arlington, VA-based company was paid by the HRCC.
Silly us. i360 isn't listed as a vendor on the HRCC's 2014, 2015 and 2016 state campaign finance reports. Nor is it listed as a vendor for Preston Republican Greg Davids's 2016 reports; Davids talked to Featherly about using the firm's mobile app.
However, a review of the three years' of campaign committee reports does indicate changes in spending patterns, with an increased reliance in 2016 on vendors in Kansas and Alexandria Va-area over those in Minnesota that where used in 2014.
So which vendor hooked Daudt and Golnik up with the power of i360's database? After looking at the 1858 Group, which was paid $100,000 for research in 2016 by the time of the HRCC's pre-general report, we don't think it's Republican operative and former Minnesota Jobs Coalition President Mark Drake's nonprofit, which has an office on the same floor as the Minnesota Jobs Coalition in the Northwestern Building in Lowertown.
Golnik acknowledged that the HRCC has access to i360’s consumer data mine but that “average users” — including candidates — do not. “That’s used at a higher level when we are doing our mail programs and our cables buys,” Golnik said. “I would use that on the independent expenditures side.” . .
According to the 2016 report (IE spending begins on page 93 in the pre-general report), Golnik used the Singularis Group of Shawnee Mission, KS for independent expenditure direct mail in MN50B against Carlson ($5,530.10); in MN44A against Klevorn ($6,459.96); in MN57A against Maye Quade ($6,502.60); in MN56B against Port ($6,377.10); in MN48 against Pryor ($6,567.56); in MN25B against Sauke ($3,377.44); and, in MN52B against T'Kach ($6,417.32). These figures are for the direct mail packages against each candidate, and may or may not include use of i360, but the firm itself does use the database.
Singularis' website notes Americans for Prosperity and Pawlenty 2012 as clients.
There are a couple of additional interconnected vendors located in Virginia also provided voter lists or did direct mail.
Perhaps payments to i360 is also part of the $24,000 paid in July for "Mailing / Voter List Rent/Purchase: Voter File" to Enlighten Solutions, located at 1507 Dade Lane, Alexandria VA (page 71, HRCC 2016 pre-primary report). Open Secrets notes that Enlighten Solutions was a vendor for three presumably federal accounts, but we couldn't find out much about the firm.
Leibowitz's past includes a stint as chair of Virginia's Republican Party and work as an account executive for Karl Rove & Co in the early 1990s.
The HRCC's 2016 report also shows that Leibowitz's firm, Targeted Creative Communications, Inc., was also a vendor for Golnik's beloved independent expenditures.
Targeted Communications was the vendor for direct mail used for independent expenditures for Chad Anderson in the special election in MN50B ($6,414.76) Later, the firm was a vendor in MN5B against Anzelc ($16,090.00); in MN21A against Bayley ($14,565.00); in MN14B against Dorholt ($14,888.00); in MN24B against Fritz ($13,861.00); in MN 57B against Huot ($4,690.00); in MN2A against Loud ($7,035.00; in MN12A against McNamar ($4,690.00); in MN17B against Sawatzky ($4,690.00); in 27A against Schindler ($4,690.00); in MN54B against Slaten ($9,380.00); in MN28B against Trehus ($2,345.00); and, in MN42A against Yarusso ($7,035.00).
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
A former oil company executive from Minnesota has been ordered to repay $6.5 million in "ill-gotten gains," plus a fine and accrued interest, in the wake of a stock manipulation scheme involving a North Dakota oil loading facility for which he and business associates reaped an estimated $32 million.
An Oct. 31 order from the federal Securities and Exchange Commission puts Michael L. Reger on the hook for nearly $8 million for his involvement with Dakota Plains Holdings, a Minnesota company that owns the oil terminal in New Town in northwest North Dakota.
Reger must repay investors a $6.5 million "disgorgement," a term for funds that were received through illegal or unethical business transactions. He was also ordered to pay $669,365 in interest, plus a $750,000 fine.
In a separate action, the SEC charged Reger's former business partner, Ryan Gilbertson, in the stock manipulation scheme, for allegedly orchestrating an elaborate scheme to siphon millions of dollars from Dakota Plains Holdings Inc. Two others have also been charged in the stock manipulation case.
For Reger, 40, the SEC's action represents a staggering blow to a once promising career. His family has been involved in the oil and gas business since the 1930s. In 2012 and 2013, Forbes named Reger one of "America's Most Powerful CEOs 40 and Under." He received widespread recognition for the company's success as Bakken oil production soared.
Last August Reger was terminated as chief executive from Northern Oil and Gas Inc., a Wayzata, Minn., company which he co-founded in 2006. His firing came soon after Reger told company officials that he had received notice from the SEC that he was the target of an investigation for securities violations. . . .
SEC investigators concluded that Reger acted negligently in failing to disclose his ownership and control of Dakota Plains. Federal securities law prohibits a person to offer securities while attempting to mislead or commit fraud on the purchaser.
Meanwhile, investors of Northern Oil and Gas Inc. have filed a class-action lawsuit, naming the company, Reger and interim CEO Thomas Stoelk as defendants. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in New York, accuses Reger and other company officials of unethical and illegal activities while managing the energy company. The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages, in addition to costs and attorney's fees.
We'd wondered where Reger, who contributed $71,250.00 to Minnesota Republican candidates and friendly commitees between 2006-2014 (MN CFB searchable database here), had washed up, as he disappeared from Republican campaign finance reports this cycle.
The company also gave $25,000 directly to the Minnesotan Jobs Coalition Legislative Fund PAC on August 15, 2014 (p. 6, year end report). That's at least $25,000 and perhaps as much $50,000 of good Bakken crude flowing into Minnesota politics for independent expenditures.
It's hard not to envision at least some of that oozing into the hands of the venders MJC chair (now House Majority executive director) Ben Golnik hired to craft $58,640 worth of attacks against DFL state representative Melissa Hortman in House District 36B (page 18, year end report).
After all, in the 2013-2014 session when the DFL held the majority in the Minnesota House, the Brooklyn Park Democrat chaired the Energy Policy Committee, helping to shepherd through clean energy policy.
Northern Oil and Gas Inc Chair and CEO Micheal Reger also gave big to the HRCC, the campaign committee for Minnesota House Republicans. Reger dropped $10,000 into the HRCC kitty on October 14, 2014, (p. 48 year end report) after giving the committee $25,000.00 on December 31, 2013 (p. 26 year-end report), or $35,000 for the cycle.
He was also generous in 2014 to individual Republican state representatives and challengers campaigns, as well as Republican Attorney General candidate Scott Newman (all information via the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board's searchable database):
02-05-2014 Gunderson, Heidi Ann House Dist. 42B Committee $1,000.00 02-05-2014 Uglem, Mark W House Dist. 36A Committee $1,000.00 02-07-2014 Johnson, Brian L House Dist. 32A Committee $1,000.00 02-08-2014 Kresha, Ronald House Dist. 9B Committee $1,000.00 02-11-2014 Nelson, Gary House Dist. 17A Committee $1,000.00 02-17-2014 Barrett, Robert (Bob) C House Dist. 32B Committee $1,000.00 02-19-2014 Todd-Harlin, Andrea House Dist. 51A Committee $1,000.00 06-17-2014 Fenton, Kelly A House Dist. 53B Committee $1,000.00 06-20-2014 Daudt, Kurt House Dist. 31A Committee $1,000.00 07-10-2014 Anselmo, Dario Arthur House Dist. 49A Committee $1,000.00 08-13-2014 Newman, Scott Atty. Gen. Committee $2,500.00 10-22-2014 Rutzick, Ryan L House Dist. 44B Committee $1,000.00 02-05-2014 Stensrud, Kirk D House Dist. 48A Committee $1,000.00 02-05-2014 Quam, Duane R House Dist. 25A Committee $1,000.00 02-07-2014 Peterson, Roz House Dist. 56B Committee $1,000.00 02-15-2014 Kiel, Debra (Deb) L House Dist. 1B Committee $1,000.00 02-18-2014 Bowles, Polly Peterson House Dist. 49A Committee $1,000.00 03-15-2014 Petersburg, John House Dist. 24A Committee $1,000.00 02-08-2014 Green, Steve House Dist. 2B Committee $1,000.00
That's $18,000 more total to Minnesota House Republican candidates. Add that to the $35,000 to the HRCC and the $25,000 to the MJC, Reger & Company gave $78,000 to help flip the chamber, and possibly $25,000 more via the RSLC.
Those checks that helped flip the Minnesota House in 2014 were drawn from some hard-working North Dakota oil money, if we're to believe those scallywags at the federal Security and Exchange Commission.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
In other action, the FEC voted unanimously to dismiss a case (MUR 6794) involving appearance by Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) in a television and internet ad for a home remodeling company. In the video, Emmer stated that he was a candidate for Congress and stood in front of an “Emmer for Congress” sign.
Emmer’s campaign committee acknowledge that Emmer filmed a testimonial for the company at its request but claimed the company was not authorized to broadcast it, and upon learning that the ad was being aired, the campaign committee directed the company to stop.
Those who filed the dismissed complaint were on their own with that piece of heel work.
Photo: Stephen Colbert, America's greatest patriot, in a screenshot memefied by Dan Feidt. Bluestem was sent a tote bag and ink pen that lit up for sharing an mp4 of the clip. We've never had to figure out many pennies fit in it.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Apparently others have noticed. In its endorsement of First District Congressman Tim Walz for another term, the editors of the Worthington Globe observe in Return Walz to Washington for another term:
. . . The Lugar Center of Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy ranked Walz fourth among 434 members of the U.S. House in its bipartisan index for 2015; the index measures how often a member of Congress introduces bills that succeed in attracting co-sponsors from members of the other party, and how often they co-sponsor a bill introduced from across the aisle.
It’s hard to imagine Hagedorn, if elected, earning a similar rating. He has been a strong supporter of Trump, who has alienated many within his own party (but, of course, is by no means out of the race thanks to the many imperfections of Hillary Clinton). He has campaigned with intonations of fear, offering dire warnings of massive immigration to America by this country’s enemies along with other far-right mythmaking. . . .
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Democrats brought the bill to put this constitutional amendment proposal on this year's ballot through the legislature when they had full throttled control in 2013. Not one ordinary Minnesotan asked for it. Not one. It was devised by those feckless lawmakers who, knowing that we continued to squash salary increase proposals in the legislature, wanted to find another way to get their pay raised.
That description--branding the measure partisan and those favoring it "feckless--is at odds with the history of the amendment's origins that state senator Carrie Ruud, R-Breezy Point, shared at a Republican basic party operating unit (BPOU) gathering on Thursday.
Sen. Carrie Ruud, R-Breezy Point, talked of her work to get an amendment to the state constitution that would take away legislators' power of setting their own pay and replace it with an appointed citizen commission. She said she discovered the idea through her involvement with the National Foundation for Women Legislators, after a delegate from the state of Washington told her about it. It's a good solution to break the legislative gridlock around the issue, she said. The fear of political blowback effectively shuts down any hope of a frank discussion on legislator pay.
"We can't ever talk about it," she said. "We can't have an honest conversation, because it's the postcard in your next election that says 'You tried to raise your pay.'"
Ruud described the rules for appointing pay commission members, that were designed to help ensure not only that there wouldn't be a partisan bias on the new body, but that the legislature as a whole couldn't exert influence on it. Appointed by the governor and the state supreme court chief justice, the 16 members of the committee are split evenly between eight DFLers and eight Republicans. In order to be eligible to serve, potential appointees can't be current or former legislators or their spouses, lobbyists, legislative employees, judges, elected officials in the executive branch, or employees of the executive branch, she said.
"We tried to make it as tight as we possibly can, so that commision cannot be part of the Legislature, or be influenced by the Legislature," Ruud said. "It's a total citizen entity."
Voters have the opportunity to mark their ballots for or against the constitutional amendment in this year's general election.
Looking over the legislative history of the amendment, Bluestem finds that however "feckless" Draz might find Ruud and four DFLers in the Senate to be (the authors of the senate version of the bill for the amendment), his painting of the bill as partisan exposes some fascinating political gamesmanship.
House Republican strategy: All about the 2014 election
It's got the feel of the creation of a talking point for the 2014 Minnesota House elections, especially when one looks at the vote on the bill in the Senate.
Senate bill and vote bipartisan
In the Senate, the bill passed with a 43-23 bipartisan vote, with Michelle Fischbach, Paynesville; Paul Gazelka, Nisswa; Mary Kiffmeyer, Big Lake; Warren Limmer, Maple Grove; Sean Nienow, Cambridge; Scott Newman, R-Hutchinson; and Ruud voting for it.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
In what may be the only debate in Minnesota's Eighth Congressional District race, Democratic incumbent Rick Nolan and Republican challenger Stewart Mills III will face off at 10: 00 a.m.
Via livestreaming provided by The Uptake, readers can watch the forum here. Click on the video to make it play.
The granddaddy of races around here this election season — outside of the shambles of the presidential runs, of course — has to be the race for the 8th Congressional District.
Republican Stewart Mills vs. Democrat incumbent U.S. Rep. Rick Nolan.
Liberal vs. conservative.
Kinda young vs. kinda old.
Pro-mining vs. pro-mining.
Hunter vs. hunter.
Wealthy businessman vs. wealthier businessman.
And with a place in Washington on the line to represent the interests of Northeastern Minnesota — control of Congress could even be at stake.
It’s a rematch from 2014, and, today in Duluth, the two men take the stage together once again as the News Tribune’s series of candidate forums this fall continues on, this forum co-sponsored by the Duluth Area Chamber of Commerce. . . .
Nolan defeated Mills in a 48.5 percent to 47.1 percent split in 2014, according to Ballotpedia, which also reports:
According to OpenSecrets, Minnesota's 8th District ranked second highest in outside spending out of all 2014 U.S. House races. Groups spent a total of $12,563,539 on the election, a close second to the $13,489,481 spent in California's 7th District.[10] The two largest contributors were the DCCC, which spent $4,350,664 opposing Mills, and the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), which spent $3,249,026 opposing Nolan.[11]
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
600 14TH STREET, NW SUITE 800 WASHINGTON, DC 20005
06/15/2016
5000.00
5000.00
LKQ CORPORATION EMPLOYEE GOOD GOVERNMENT
500 WEST MADISON STREET SUITE 2800 CHICAGO, Illinois 60661
06/16/2016
2000.00
2000.00
Once again, Hamm received $4500, but no other disbursements were made in the quarter.
Should Miller's supporters fret about whether any money from this federal committee with all of it corporate givers trickle down to humble Prinsburg? In the October 2014 filing, $22058.39 in Disbursement for Allocated Federal/Nonfederal Activity was spent on administrative costs, so not definitely not directly.
Regardless, if Republicans in West Central Minnesota are concerned about federal campaign committees, they don't have to look beyond their own house caucus to find a little moneypot.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Update September 29: The mailing that Regan received is from 2016, but it's not from ABM's federal PAC. Rather, it's from the Alliance for a Better Minnesota Action Fund, a state political fund. Here's the side of the card that includes the disclaimer as is required by state law:
It's not the text that Regan described in her letter and it's not from the federal fund. We've pointed out to Regan and in this post that it's a common practice of ideological non-profits like the Alliance for A Better Minnesota (on the left) and the Freedom Club (on the right) to establish legally separate political funds. Both organizations maintain legally separate state and federal PACs in accordance with Minnesota statutes. The Minnesota Jobs Coalition, also a non-profit, works only on the state level, and so its legislative fund PAC is registered only with the Minnesota campaign finance board.
It's worth noting that the new postcard isn't a negative attack on Representative Miller (an earlier letter writer claimed ABM had sent negative mail pieces about Miller beginning in 2014 through the present) but a positive independent expenditure urging voters to cast a ballot for Falk.
It's worth noting that Regan originally sent us only the address side of the postcard (we've obscured her address but left her name on it):
By originally sending only this side, Regan thought to bolster her published claim that the federal PAC--a legally separate fund--sent her the piece about Falk since the return addresses are the same and that all entities using that address are "one and the same."
As for that national network to which ABM belongs, this too is not unusual. The Coalition of Minnesota Businesses appears to be part of the BIPAC national network that was established in 2001. (The CMB--not its legally separate PAC or legally separate IEPC--is sending "issue advocacy" postcards in MN17A) If Regan dislikes networking and organizations with PACs and IE funds, she can find plenty of targets. The other letter writer saw them as part of free speech, but claimed ABM had sent out "hate mailings" against Tim Miller.
[end update]
Bluestem's household received its issue of the Clara City Herald in the mail today, and as with last week's edition, the letters-to-the-editor in the Opinions section did not disappoint.
DeGraff resident Cindy Regan also has a bug up her bonnet about the Democratic front group, and like the earlier letter writer Mike Thein, her memory of the political mail she's received doesn't match campaign finance reports of spending. [See our update above; the 2016 mail piece doesn't match her description and was not sent by the federal PAC].
Nor does she have a grasp of how independent expenditures work. Regan writes in part:
Andrew Falk's campaign seems to center around telling us about Tim Miller's so called supporters such as the Jobs Coalition, Reynolds America, Blue Cross Blue Shield, Koch Industries, Las Vegas Sands, Exon [sic] Mobil, and Northern Oil and Gas. As of yet there hasn't been a single mailing from any of these organizations on Tim Miller's behalf.
We don't know if Regan deliberately gives a shortened, incorrect name for the MN Jobs Coalition, whose political fund received contributions directly or indirectly from the corporations she names. But she does misrepresent what Falk wrote.
Regan continues in her letter in the September 14 Herald (no online edition):
. . . However, I have received political mailings from Alliance for a Better Minnesota Federal PAC with Falk's picture and the words, "Andrew Falk Agrees!" . . .
[See our update above; the 2016 mail piece she provided doesn't match her description and was not sent by the federal PAC].
Had such a mail piece ever been sent by a federal PAC on behalf of a state candidate, former Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board executive director Gary Goldsmith and his staff would be very cross indeed.That federal race spending needs to be spent on federal races--and indeed it was. We found no evidence of independent expenditure cash on mailings in the Minnesota House District 17A race.
The only independent expenditures by ABM's Federal PAC were related to online ads against Republican United States Senate candidates from Minnesota: Mike McFadden and a couple of also-rans.
Even if Regan is mis-remembering the copy from an online ad as a mail piece, we're at a loss to figure out why the online ads would include Falk's photo and the copy "Andrew Falk Agrees!" since we're not sure about what, if anything, Falk and Mike McFadden would agree.
Perhaps it was some other group. [Update: it was sent by the state PAC, a legally separate entity]
An earlier PAC kept by America Votes, American Votes-Minnesota, was terminated in 2014.
Since the America Votes-Minnesota shares an office suite with ABM, Regan believes that these organizations are THE SAME! She continues:
I decided to do a little digging into this PAC [Alliance for a Better Minnesota Federal PAC], and they actually share the same address in St. Paul with an organization called America Votes. In my opinion, they are one and the same.
Regan then lists the national partners of America Votes, all found on the national group's website Our Partners.
Whatever the case, neither the ABM Federal PAC nor the America Votes Action Fund--Minnesota, sent any mail out in 2014 or since, to any state or federal race in Minnesota, much less House District 17A. It's puzzling that two Letters To The Editor attempt to pin their tales on these donkey allies without producing a copy of any mail piece or campaign finance report to support their claims.
Was there a mail piece with Falk's picture and copy about agreement? We don't have it in our collection of 2014 political junkmail, but someone might have sent it.
Just not ABM or America Votes.
Regan does switch over later in the letter to discuss votes that Falk took on abortion, child custody and daycare regulation. While the list appears to be drawn from a 2011-2012 cycle voting checklist (she doesn't mention which group put the key votes together nor chose the wording). While we don't share Regan's positions, Bluestem thinks this issues-based approach is much more grounded and legitimate than her forays about mis-remembered sources of the junkmail she may or may not have gotten.
For a fact-based discussion of spending, "negative campaign messages and a loud drum beat paid for largely by money from political action committees outside the district" and voter turnout in Minnesota House District 17A in 2014, we recommend Tom Cherveny's Andrew Falk in the aftermath of defeat, in the West Central Tribune.
Photo: Negative campaigning at its most simple.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Falk's letter to the editor was published in last week's Clara City Herald; in the Wednesday, September 7 edition of the small-town paper, Mike Thein, a supporter of freshman state representative Tim Miller, R-Prinsburg responds.
It's a mighty peculiar document, not just in terms of Thein's omission of the most vexing part of The Kipster's behavior (bumping into and pushing volunteers), but in Thein's invention of a false equivalence between physical aggression in a parade by a MN Jobs Coalition tracker and "negative ads and hate mailings" from the left-leaning Alliance For A Better Minnesota.
Thein writes in part (the paper isn't online):
Now here is the irony of Andrew's letter: Tim Miller has experienced the very same tactics and more from groups like Alliance for a Better Minnesota for years. By the way this is a DFL Super PAC! These types of groups have followed Tim Miller around for over two years and attacked him relentlessly in negative ads and hate mailings while supporting Andrew with praise.
While the progressive group did run cable, radio and online ads against MIller close to the 2014 election, we didn't recall the Alliance for a Better Minnesota Action Fund sending any "hate mailings" about Miller in 2014--or since. Until a week ago, Bluestem's world headquarters was located in Minnesota House District 17A.
We checked our recollections about ABM's independent expenditures in 2014 with the political fund's year end report for that year, and sure enough, the group's action fund didn't spend a dime on any kind of mailings in 2014. Nor has the PAC spent a dime on any kind of independent expenditures against Tim Miller so far in this cycle (2015 and 2016).
On the possibility that Mr. Thein might have gotten "issue" junk mail from ABM itself that berated Miller, we contacted ABM Executive Director Joe Davis to see if the group had sent this type of mail into the district. Davis replied:
Nope we haven't mailed anything negative on Tim Miller this cycle either, issue or otherwise. Thanks for checking!. . .
One has to wonder what group Thein imagines is relentlessly sending "hate mailings" to his mailbox for the last two years and more. Perhaps he can be specific in his next letter to the editor, including PAC reports filed with the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board.
In the meantime, the imaginary ABM hate mailings just aren't the same as a tracker who bumps into and pushes volunteers walking in a small town parade, and that leads us to the final point about independent political funds that Thein brings up on behalf of Miller:
. . . The difference is Tim Miller knows it's part of politics and our rights to free speech and expression. Even when mailers, tactics, or comments are hurtful to Representative Tim Miller he will defend their rights to say it.
The fact of the matter is Representative Tim Miller is a good, honorable man and someone I call a personal friend. . . .
That's certainly a different attitude about negative mail than what Miller's wife expressed in 2014. Moreover, Mrs. Miller linked the independent expenditure to Falk. Perish the thought that Miller and other Republican candidates might want to have it both ways about attack pieces from PACs.
And Thein's final defense raises the question: does Miller himself think that physical aggression in parades is acceptable behavior? Or is it simply the phantom ABM Action Fund "hate mailings" that he's willing to defend?
Photo: Mike Thein, who sees nothing wrong with a tracker getting physical with an opponent's supporters in a parade. Does his personal friend Tim Miller agree? Photo via Facebook.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 33166 770th Ave, Ortonville, MN 56278) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
The Republican State Leadership Committee gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to the MN Jobs Coalition in 2014 to flip control of the Minnesota House from Democratic to Republican hands--and vowed in July 2015 to do the same thing for the state senate in 2016.
It's time to take a look at the Q2 report, due July 15, to look for clues on how that's going. Here are the itemized contributions from Minnesota:
This giving from Minnesota contributors supplements that we reported in June:
What's in it for Minnesota? On page 9, the "Minnesota Senate Republican Caucus" gave $100 in January, while page 11 lists a $100 contribution by the same in February. (Since the CFB server is down, we can't check to see if this is from the Senate Victory Fund ). [Update: this expenditure not listed in the SVF's Q1 and Q2 reports].
Where in Minnesota was the RSLC spending in the second quarter (April though June)? Here's a pdf of the items--bills for conference calls and direct marketing paid to Republican fundraising and marketing firm, FLS Connect.
If the Republican State Leadership Committee intends to give to the Minnesota Jobs Coalition, its political fund or other political committees and IE funds to flip the Minnesota Senate and retain the House, apparently that spending will come in the third and fourth quarters. The Q3 filing (for getting and spending in July, August and September) is due on October 15.
Other bonbons in the report
The biggest contributor to the RSLC is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce And Related Entities/Institute for Legal Reform, which had given $2,450,235 as of June 30, 2016.
Our dear friends at the Corrections Corporation of America gave a mere $30,000 for the year, which might cost them as the federal government withdraws from the private prison bed rental market. That shuttered prison in Appleton, Minnesota, probably will lose value as the market is suddenly flooded with empty hoosegows. It's a good thing that Dayton and the senate Democrats rejected Tim Miller's notion of buying the joint for $99 million. Already we see in CNBC in that Prison stocks plunge after report Justice Department will end use of private prisons.
Other big contributors come from the noisy set of drug companies, railroads, energy interests and payday lenders the martyrs call the world. Here's the entire 103-page Form 8872 filing, where our readers can perform Adam's curse, doing the work of reading for themselves.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Minnesota State Representative Peggy Bennett, R-Albert Lea, campaigns online under the slogan of "People Before Politics" and a public persona who will:
Listen carefully to your concerns and represent you reliably in the legislature
Engage in healthy debate and endeavor to find common goals and common ground
Be fair-minded in addressing constituent concerns, firm in standing for conservative principles
The piece equates the freedom to marry the person one loves with the ability to marry a German Shepherd, the notion that immigration reform would take Social Security away from those who paid into it, and other non sequiturs that would be comic, save for the fact that they're presented as "accurate."
Among Republican friends, Bennett shares what she thinks of her Democratic constituents (transcript of audio below as Bennett reads the list, while providing her own side commentary; Bluestem has placed the latter in bold). Her remarks begin with the reading of the list, so we're not sure how she introduced this loving (but definitely not-Letterman) portrait of the loyal opposition:
I vote Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I can even marry my German Shepherd.
Number 9 I vote Democrat because I believe oil companies profits are 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon 15% is not.
Number 8, I vote Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending money I earned than I would. Let me tell you, I heard that over and over again when I was sitting on the floor last year. You're not spending enough, we have a surplus, they would spend it all over time
Number 7, I vote Democrat because freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
Number 6, I vote Democrat because I'm way to irresponsible to own a gun and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves, I'm also thankful that I have a 9-1-1 service that gets the police to your home in order to identify your body after a home invasion.
Number 5, I vote Democrat because I'm not concerned about billions of babies being aborted, so long as we can keep Death Row inmates alive and comfy.
Number 4, I vote Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free healthcare, education, and social security benefits and we should take away social security benefits from those who paid into it.
Number 3, I vote Democrat because businesses should not be allowed make profits for themselves, they need to break even and give the rest to away to the government for redistribution as the Democratic Party sees fit.
Number 2, I vote Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to re-write the constitution every few days to see the fringe groups who would never get their agenda's past the voters. And last but not least,
Number 1, I vote Democrat because I think it's better to take pay billions of dollars in oil to people who hate us, but not drill our own oil because it might upset some endangered beetle, gopher, or fish here in America. We don't care about beetles, gophers, or fish in the oil countries, just as long as they're in America. So there ya go, the top ten reasons to Vote Democrat.
Here's the audio:
Perhaps Kurt Daudt can let Bennett know that Minnesota doesn't have a Death Row--or perhaps one shouldn't sweat the details when choosing to let hyper-partisanship all hang out.
Is it wise to mock Democrats in Minnesota House District 27A?
Revealing her sarcastically nasty partisan side might not be the wisest move for the retired elementary teacher and freshman state lawmaker, since the swing district includes a lot of Democratic voters. In 2014, US Senator Al Franken received 54.06 percent of the vote; Congressman Tim Walz earned 59.47 percent; Governor Dayton and Lt. Gov. Smith received a plurality of 49.84 percent, and so on.
On the other hand voters selected three Republican-endorsed candidates, including state Supreme Court Justice candidate Michelle MacDonald, Secretary of State wannabe Dan Severson and Bennett. Her first term incumbent opponent, Shannon Savick, stumbled badly in the race.
The district swung more heavily Democratic in the 2012 presidential year, election results reveal. President Barack Obama captured 55.37 percent of the vote, while United States Senator Amy Klobuchar and Walz crushed with 68.32 percent and 63.80 percent respectively. State senator Dan Sparks--on the ballot again this year--nabbed 67.00 percent of the vote, while Savick received 47.70 percent of the vote in the three-way race to defeat one-term incumbent Rich Murray.
The district has historically been a swing district, and in 2014 more than $377,000 in independent expenditures were reported for [and against] Bennett and DFLer Shannon Savick of Wells in the 10 months leading up to the election.
Photo: Peggy Bennett and her Shiloh Shepherd Coulter, who can read so don't write mean things online (Via Bennett campaign website, top); 2016 DFL opponent and community college dean Gary Schindler (via Austin Herald, bottom).
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
From the looks of the letters to the editor flowing into the local papers in House District 12A, Backer backers just can't help themselves when it comes to place-baiting.
Backer backers are the supporters of Minnesota state representative Jeff Backer, R-Browns Valley, who won the seat in the 2014 Republican wave, defeating Elbow Lake's Jay McNamar by a mere 660 votes.
Consider the latest missive, Wolverton excavator William Nichol's Watch what Jay does, not what he says. While Nichol hits the usual 'phobe notes about marriage equality and the dignity of transgender people ("forcing girls and boys to shower together"), he accuses McNamar of favoring metro areas in the distribution of Local Government Aid (LGA):
. . . Secondly, in 2013, Local Government Aid was increased by $80 million. However, half of the new money went to the metro areas. Jay voted for this unfair distribution of funding. . . .
How is it that Jay didn’t actually vote for what he claimed he stood for on the campaign trail? Simple answer – he really is metro at heart. How can he claim to care about rural values but not defend them in office? Weakness. Or he takes us for chumps! Or both. . . .
Let's turn to the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities to understand why LGA isn't simply a thing for "us" in Greater Minnesota but not for "the metro areas." In fact, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities put out a fact sheet about the "Top LGA Myths."
Note that the working group that crafter the 2013 formula reform includes Greater Minnesota Republicans, not just some secret cabal of metro power brokers. We bold the names of rural Republicans on the list, while placing the names of Greater Minnesota Democrats in italics:
The 2013 LGA formula reform was developed by a working group including legislators and all city groups. The bill containing the LGA formula (HF 1608/ SF 1491) had broad bipartisan support. Authors included Reps. Lien; Davnie, Lenczewski, Simonson, Faust, Mahoney, Davids, Carlson, C. Johnson, Hamilton, Torkelson, Kiel, Nelson, McNamar, Hansen, Marquart,Fabian, Loeffler, Bly, and Bernardy.
We didn't include Simonson as a Greater Minnesota representative, since Duluth is a "first class city." Note that the majority of the working group, regardless of party, represent Greater Minnesota.
It's clear from the support for the LGA reform from the greater Minnesota cities themselves--and the statewide, bipartisan working group that crafted it--that the aim was to do best for all Minnesota. Even Backer praised the compromise while campaigning in October 2014, according to the Wahpeton and Breckenridge Daily News, though he said the increased spending was "not enough."
But for Backer backers, LGA is just another opportunity to placebait, pitting Minnesotans against Minnesotans. Enough.
Photo: Jeff Backer, R-Browns Valley.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
Republican congressional candidate Jim Hagedorn is seeing the fundraising advantages of being the endorsed candidate rather than the insurgent.
Two years ago, Hagedorn had raised just $75,000 through the first half of 2014 when he was hoping to win a primary election and snatch the Republican nomination from endorsed candidate Aaron Miller.
Hagedorn succeeded in beating Miller, but he was in a fundraising hole throughout the general election campaign and lost to Democratic Congressman Tim Walz by 8 percentage points.
In 2016, Hagedorn has the Republican endorsement and managed to more than double his fundraising in the same period — collecting just over $190,000 (a figure that drops to $181,000 when the candidate's personal donations to the campaign are subtracted).
Looked at in another light, however, we see that Republican moneybags are dropping fewer dimes in Minnesota's First Congressional District, which stretches from the Wisconsin state line to South Dakota along the Iowa border.
In 2014, Miller, the endorsed candidate, had collected $295,681.75 by the end of June, according to his July Quarterly report to the Federal Election Commission. Add in Hagedorn's 2014 cash, and it's clear that Republican donors collectively had invested far more money in seeking to regain the seat than Hagedorn has collected this year.
Miller did employ a revolving loan system in which he'd lend his campaign money, then pay it back, to the tune of $120,000 for the cycl, while giving the committee $3500; Hagedorn had lent his committee $5000, while giving it $15475.00.
Together, both candidates sucked $370,681 out of Republican coffers, compared to $190,000 this year.
Fischenich points out the good news and bad for the Blue Earth Republican:
That's the good news for Hagedorn as he prepares for a Nov. 8 rematch with Walz. He has $43,000 more cash on hand at the end of the second quarter than he did at the same point in the last campaign, and Walz has $53,000 less in the bank.
The bad news for Hagedorn is that Walz still has a massive fundraising lead, having raised $1.15 million through June 30 and with $489,000 in cash on hand. So the Mankato resident has $10 in the bank for the fall campaign for every $1 Hagedorn has set aside.
The race doesn't seem to have captured the attention of the national handicappers or that of much of anyone.
Screengrab:On Facebook on July 18, Hagedorn let supporters know how much he loves Donald Trump: "Prospective nominees Donald Trump and Mike Pence have my complete support and I look forward to running with them and offering bold solutions to Make America Great Again!" Given that Hagedorn wholeheartedly supported TPP in 2014, Bluestem thinks that's mighty generous of him.
If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.
Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email sally.jo.sorensen at gmail.com as recipient.
On June 14, 2016, all political committees, political funds, independent expenditure committees and independent expenditure funds are required to file a Report of Receipts and Expenditures for the period covering January 1 through May 31, 2016.
We're eager to learn where and with whom our friends at the MN Jobs Coalition are doing their getting and spending. The group was instrumental in flipping the Minnesota House from DFL to Republican hands in 2014, and its biggest 2014 bagmen, the Republican State Leadership Committee, has put control of the upper chamber on its hit list, as we reported last year in MN Jobs Coalition Legislative Fund's biggest donor in flipping House vows to take Senate.
Now the reports appear to be quarterly. We embed the latest report, covering the first three month of 2016, below.
What's in it for Minnesota? On page 9, the "Minnesota Senate Republican Caucus" gave $100 in January, while page 11 lists a $100 contribution by the same in February. (Since the CFB server is down, we can't check to see if this is from the Senate Victory Fund ). [Update: this expenditure not listed in the SVF's Q1 and Q2 reports].
We'll look at the national money in another post. The usual suspects (Koch Brothers and WalMart with $100,000 each, Big Pharma and the like) are contributing--as are the owners of the Appleton Prison, CCA (page 24), $25,000. Heaven knows what other bonbons we might unwrap.
Bluestem Prairie is conducting its summer fundraising drive. If you appreciate our posts and original analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Perhaps more importantly, the newly-formed independent expenditure political commitee illustrates how how associations with joint private and public membership work not only to promote policy, but to "elevate" issues to candidates and voters and to spend money to support candidates for offices.
In some ways, the AgriGrowth Council's three-pronged strategic campaign to elect candidates friendly to its policy agenda could be the poster child for the DISCLOSE Act, an effort to put an amendment to the Minnesota state constitution before the voters.
The 2015 History has shown us that state election results directly impact the future of food and agriculture in our state. With all 201 Minnesota legislators up for re-election in 2016, AgriGrowth will work to ensure that the voice of our industry is heard by candidates and voters. We will be involved again with the “A Greater Minnesota” Coalition to elevate issues important to Minnesota’s agriculture and food sector. AgriGrowth will also be forming a new independent expenditure political committee to help amplify our ability to support pro-food and ag candidates for offices (page2).
We look forward to learning which candidates might be considered anti-food, as we have yet to meet one.
Since 1968, AgriGrowth Council has been representing members from all areas of Minnesota’s food systems and agricultural sectors. In its role as an advocate, convener and trusted information source, AgriGrowth brings together its members for the purpose of engaging in safe and solution-oriented conversations, aimed at finding common-ground.
As a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, AgriGrowth often serves as a sounding board, idea generator and asks the tough questions necessary for moving the food and ag sector and Minnesota forward.
The AgriGrowth Council is a registered association with the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board; Aasness and Cory Bennett are registered lobbyists for the association. Bennett also serves other registered associations.
We contacted Aasness by phone and email for this post. In addition to serving as executive director and registered lobbyist for the AgriGrowth Council, he's the chair of the new independent expenditure political committee. Here's his emailed response (quotes in original):
"2016 will be an important election year in Minnesota, with all 201 legislative seats up for election. AgriGrowth believes it's important to engage in efforts that help support the competitiveness and growth of Minnesota's diverse agriculture sector. One of the ways we do so is to help elect pro-ag candidates to the state legislature. As we did during the last election, AgriGrowth will be working with other organizations on these efforts. In addition, AgriGrowth has expanded its ability to participate in elections by forming an independent expenditure political committee called the AgFood Alliance. This entity is meant to complement AgriGrowth’s current efforts to help support and elect pro-agriculture legislators."
The Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board (CFB) also responded to our questions. According responses by CFB director Gary Goldsmith to email queries, the new IE political committee isn't part of the registered association.
If the AgriGrowth Council wished to attach its good name directly to a contribution, it would have to have to form a political fund (as would any other registered association). Goldsmith writes:
The new organization is organized as an independent expenditure political committee. Being a political committee means that the association operates as an entity separate from any affiliated or supporting association. Technically, a political committee is a group of people, not part of some other association. . . . some people – maybe closely affiliated with another association, got together and formed a political committee. A political committee is never formed by an association. If an existing association wants to use its money to engage in campaign spending, it would register a political fund account. In that case, the account is part of the overall association and the political fund is formed by the association.
So when the 2015 Annual Report of the Agrigrowth Council states, "AgriGrowth will also be forming a new independent expenditure political committee to help amplify our ability to support pro-food and ag candidates for office," don't believe it.
Or when the executive director writes, "AgriGrowth has expanded its ability to participate in elections by forming an independent expenditure political committee called the AgFood Alliance. This entity is meant to complement AgriGrowth’s current efforts to help support and elect pro-agriculture legislators[,]" don't believe him either.
That's against the rules.
We asked "Under what circumstances can it [the AgFood Alliance' give campaign contributions to elected state officials?" Goldsmith responded:
Since this association is registered as an independent expenditure political committee it may not contribute to candidates, to party units, or to general purpose political committees or funds.
At least we won't have to follow the money, as it's not supposed to go anywhere beyond independent expenditures. But there are other vexing ethical questions here.
The one about AgriGrowth Council's public and foreign members
Membership in the AgriGrowth Council's Board of Directors includes a member of the governor's cabinet and the dean of the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences at University of Minnesota.
What is the relationship between public employees, a public agency and centers at public universities and Agri-Growth Council related independent expenditure political committee to support (and possibly oppose) candidates for office?
Will the public centers and public employees recuse themselves from any involvement with the independent expenditure political committee? Will there be a firewall so that no public dollars find their way into the AgFood Alliance coffers? Is there a mean to avoid in-kind contributions of public employees' time?
What will happen if the Agri-Growth Council's independent expenditure political committee supports candidates opposed to the Dayton administration's policy--say the buffer law?
With these sorts of question in mind, asked Goldsmith additional questions via email. Are there any limitations on the government and public higher education members in contributing to the [independent expenditure political committee] ?
Goldsmith: There are no campaign finance limits under Chapter 10A. However, other statutes not under the Board’s jurisdiction may limit the use of government or public education money. Since any such laws would not be under the Board’s jurisdiction, I have never examined whether any exist.
Can a foreign government agency contribute to [an independent expenditure political committee] ?
Goldsmith:No since any political committee or fund is for the purpose of influencing elections, foreign governments and foreign nationals cannot contribute – this is a federal law prohibition
Will that be a problem? Only if that member gives money to the independent expenditure political committee called the AgFood Alliance, which legally was not formed by the AgriGrowth Council, whatever it tells its members in its annual report or to us in emails.
We're still trying to establish if there are laws preventing Minnesota state agencies and centers at public universities from contributing to political committees making independent expenditure to support or oppose legislators who vote on their budgets and shape policy.
While this practice might turn out to be legal, we suspect that it won't pass the average citizen's smell test, just as the legal fiction that independent expenditure political committee wasn't formed by the group that's claiming to form it was part of a three-part strategic plan.
A Greater Minnesota or https://www.farmandfoodmn.org/
Aasness' email alludes to an effort to elect candidates in 2014 that share the AgriGrowth Council's vision of what favoring agriculture and food means:
One of the ways we do so is to help elect pro-ag candidates to the state legislature. As we did during the last election, AgriGrowth will be working with other organizations on these efforts.
As we noted in the beginning of this post, the Annual Report is specific about this endeavor:
AgriGrowth will work to ensure that the voice of our industry is heard by candidates and voters. We will be involved again with the “A Greater Minnesota” Coalition to elevate issues important to Minnesota’s agriculture and food sector.
So what is "A Greater Minnesota"? We live out in it, in sunny Maynard, but on July 28, 2014, AgriNews reported in Minn. farm coalition creates 5-point pledge for state legislators that the AgriGrowth Council, Minnesota Pork Producers Association, the Minnesota Turkey Growers Association, the Chicken and Egg Association of Minnesota and the Minnesota Milk Producers Association had a different definition:
A new coalition of Minnesota food and farm groups is asking state legislative candidates to pledge their support for agriculture.
The coalition, known as A Greater Minnesota, developed its five-point Minnesota Farm and Food Pledge. The goal is raising awareness, particularly among legislative candidates, of farming, food production and their economic impact in the state, coalition officials say.
This effort slipped completely under anycampaign finance or lobbying reporting. According to Goldsmith and the records online, "A Greater Minnesota" didn't register as an association nor as any sort of political committee.
In an email, Goldsmith explained the campaign end of the situation:
Since it avoids the “magic words” like vote for, vote against, etc, it’s not an independent expenditure. Even though they got the pledge from the candidates, there is no Board authority on whether that would be the kind of cooperation necessary to make the publication a contribution. With a narrow definition of independent expenditure in Minnesota (and everything that falls outside the definition excluded), it’s easy for organizations to avoid the campaign finance system in Minnesota.
The argument would be that this communication is for the purpose of convincing candidates to support the association’s legislation and to thank those that have pleged to do so, thus ensuring legislative success. That puts it outside the campaign finance system. Sort of like “call Senator ----- and thank her for taking the AGM pledge to protect Minnesota’s family farmers
Short skinny? There's absolutely no transparency for voters or candidates about who is funding this effort. We know who is sponsoring the drive, but there's no disclosure about the source of the money.
While the new independent expenditure political committee maintains the legal illusion that it's not part of the Agri-Growth Council, the AgFood Alliance will eventually disclose its spending, we won't see that from "A Greater Minnesota."
The 2014 pledge
So what are candidates for office supposed to pledge? (And will the independent expenditures--whether direct mail, phone banking, paid media--mention this pledge?)
Under Candidate Spotlight on the A Greater Minnesota website, candidates were asked to agree to this 5 point pledge and voters were asked to pay attention (though never to "vote for" certain candidates):
Meet the candidates running for office and find out if they have taken the pledge to support good Minnesota farms, foods and jobs.
Minnesotans have a stake in supporting all farmers in Minnesota who practice responsible farming methods whether the farms are large or small, traditional farming or organic. Fortunately, nearly every Minnesota farmer farms responsibly.
Good MN farmers are responsible stewards of their land and water. After all, they live on the land and have a vested interest in protecting the environment in and around their farms. Farmers will continue to improve upon best practices as better methods are discovered.
Good MN farmers know that the proper and ethical care of their livestock is not only the right way to treat animals, but also results in better food. Many farmers have adopted animal care policies that far exceed what is required by current standards. In recent years, activist groups have painted a distorted picture of animal care practices. In fact, many activist proposals would actually reduce the protection of farm animals from disease and also result in higher food prices.
Good MN farmers and good MN food companies support food product labeling that helps consumers make informed choices regarding nutritional information and food-allergies. We do not support labeling requirements, however, that are based on pseudo-science or activist agendas such as calling out GMOs (genetically modified organisms). The reality is most foods, even many organics, involve genetic enhancements to improve food quality and reduce the incidence of pests and disease during food production.
Good MN Farms and good MN food companies are intensely focused on ensuring safe food for consumers, often imposing new standards and best practices into their production systems that exceed what is legally required. MN farmers and food producers also support one set of standards for food safety at a federal level. Farmers and food producers across the nation should be required to uphold one uniform set of regulations that make food safety a priority.
You can register to vote, find out election dates and where to vote, monitor candidate filings and find other answers to commonly asked questions at the Secretary of State website. Voting absentee? Get your ballot online here.
Check back here throughout the fall to see what candidates you should be keeping an eye on and which ones have taken the pledge.
Bluestem trusts that our readers can use reason, Mr. Google and critical thinking to evaluate that agenda which encourages voluntary stewardship, resists environmental regulation based on "competitive" economic factors, rejects labeling the new and improved food known as GMOs, and animal welfare concerns that aren't coming from farmers, pet breeders and veterinarians. What a bandwagon.
Therein followed the pledges. They're still there though we anticipate a change is going to come once the candidate filing period closes.
Though these three efforts--lobbying, candidate and voter "education," and independent expenditures-- may be legal, together, they created the sort of tangled web that may cause ordinary citizens to think that while all Americans are equal, some corporations and nonprofits are more equal.
Is the DISCLOSE Act a piece the transparency solution?
Those "issue communications" like A Greater Minnesota could be a thing of the past if Minority Leader Paul Thissen, members of his caucus and good/transparent government advocates get their way. Last week at the Star Tribune, J. Patrick Coolican reported in House DFL proposes constitutional amendment for campaign money disclosure:
House DFLers proposed a state constitutional amendment Thursday that would make it easier to see who is giving money to efforts aiding candidates, the latest twist in an ongoing feud over the disclosure of campaign contributions.
Current law shields certain groups from having to disclose money they raise and spend as long as it is spent on so-called issue-based advertising that does not expressly say “vote for” or “vote against” a candidate.
The DFL says that’s a loophole and the proposed amendment would close it, requiring the groups to disclose where they receive the money and how they spend it.
A constitutional amendment would need to pass both houses of the Legislature to appear on the ballot and then be approved by the voters in November.
“It’s time for politicians to … give Minnesota voters the opportunity to decide for themselves if they have a right to know who is spending money to influence their vote,” said House Minority Leader Paul Thissen, DFL-Minneapolis.
Coolican reported that that Republican lawmakers responded to the proposal as if requiring disclosure for "issue" communications were solely a partisan battle. Both Republican and Democratic candidates signed that pledge, without clear disclosure of who was paying how much for its promotion among voters.
We'll eventually know who is giving money to the AgFood Alliance, but as in 2014, there will be no full transparency about two of the other tines of the AgriGrowth Council's forking out the barn of ag policy. DISCLOSE would at least let us see two-thirds of the effort.
Photos: A modern manure sprayer (above); screengrab of the Candidate Spotlight at "A Greater Minnesota"/www.farmandfoodmn.org.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Minnesota First Congressional candidate Jim Hagedorn, a Republican from Blue Earth, is notorious for provocative statements. Tim Murphy's 2014 article in Mother Jones, House Candidate Called Female Senators "Undeserving Bimbos in Tennis Shoes, cemented many voters' post-primary first impression of the candidate.
Now another writer responds to a more recent Hagedornism.
First of all, I want to point out that this is not a Daily Globe editorial; it’s a personal column.
The difference, I’d like to believe, is simple, Opinions expressed in our editorials represent the newspaper, while columns such as this are my own thoughts. And I definitely had a number of thoughts upon receiving a press release last week from Jim Hagedorn, who once again is challenging five-term incumbent Tim Walz for his 1st Congressional District seat.
Yet, even though Democrats were the primary individuals sponsoring the Star Tribune ad, it seems mean-spirited to so sharply criticize a message of inclusion and tolerance. Taft, for one, told the Star Tribune that the ad “isn’t a political ad in any way. … It was a collaboration between a corporate Republican and a political Democrat that would start everyone off on a bipartisan note.”
Hagedorn, though, wasn’t biting on any intended bipartisanship: “Minnesota already has an Islamic terrorist recruiting problem stemming from east African refugees, many of whom Walz voted to bring to the U.S. Yet, when refugees living in Minnesota were arrested and convicted for conspiring to help ISIS, Tim Walz remained silent and did nothing. The ad, it should be noted, does not include any references to the above.
Perhaps Hagedorn is simply trying to fire up the sorts of people he hopes will lend him support in the coming election season. Hopefully, though, there’s a place in him for what should be an apolitical notion: “a diverse and vibrant community.” That sounds, incidentally, like Worthington — not to mention very Minnesotan.
The editor correctly identifies Worthington as a "diverse and vibrant community." In Minnesota's racial geography shifting, David Peterson reported in the Star Tribune:
Worthington is singled out in the Census Bureau report for experiencing -- after decades of gradual change -- the largest single drop in its white population, from 83 percent of its total to 67 percent. That's a drop in raw numbers of nearly 3,000 people in a decade, at a time when the overall micropolitan population grew slightly.
At the same time, the number of Hispanics more than doubled, to more than 4,800, the fifth-fastest increase by share of population among the nation's micropolitan areas and the fastest in the Upper Midwest.
Nor is it just Hispanics. Worthington has immigrants from all over the globe, said Lakeyta Potter, integration and youth development coordinator for the local school district.
Although Hispanics are most numerous, she said, "it's Ethiopian, Oromo, Eritrean, Sudanese, folks from Ghana, from Uganda, from Laos, Vietnam, Burma, Thailand," with a Swift meatpacking plant as the main draw.
That's remarkable--and it's no mystery why the editor is draw to a very Minnesotan idea about a vibrant community.
We could go on about the kind of folks Minnesotans are, but there's a full-page ad in today's Minneapolis Star Tribune newspaper that does it better. The ad, signed by John Noseworthy, M.D., Mayo Clinic's president and CEO, and many other business and civic leaders from throughout the state, is all about Minnesota values, tolerance and understanding, and supporting diversity to create a vibrant community. You might say it's about being Minnesotan.
Worthington is in the western part of the district; Rochester in the eastern part of Minnesota's First. McGaughey and Noseworthy have a point about the peaceable community.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original research and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
The tweet embedded below, highlighting a comment from U.S. House of Representative Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes, R-CA22, from the New Yorker article, A House Divided:How a radical group of Republicans pushed Congress to the right, recalls similar--though far less dramatic--remarks made by Minnesota Seventh District Congressman Collin Peterson in 2009.
GOP headache: The birther issue, a 2009 article posted by Politico, cited the long-serving Peterson's example that conspiracy theories are nothing new:
Out-party politicians have long had to deal with conspiracy theorists on their side — the people who think that the Clintons killed Vince Foster or that the Bush administration helped orchestrate the Sept. 11 attacks.
“Twenty-five percent of my people believe the Pentagon and Rumsfeld were responsible for taking the twin towers down,” said Rep. Collin Peterson, a Democrat who represents a conservative Republican district in Minnesota. “That’s why I don’t do town meetings.”
The Republican Party of Minnesota jumped on the page 2 remarks after the Pioneer Press blog Political Animal shared them in a now defunct post. In GOP targets U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, Minnesota Public Radio's Tim Nelson reported:
It's 16 months before the next election, and Minnesota Republicans say they're mounting a renewed challenge to U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, a DFLer who represents northwestern Minnesota's 7th Congressional District.
They're calling attention to remarks he made to a Virginia-based political Web site. Peterson was quoted saying one in four of his constituents are fringe-thinking conspiracy theorists.
Peterson is one of the most conservative Democrats in Congress -- and one of the safest. He won his last election by a nearly 3-to-1 margin.
But Republicans say Peterson's remarks have made him newly vulnerable.
Peterson recently told Politico.com that he didn't like to hold town hall meetings in his district because so many of his constituents hold fringe ideas, including the belief that the Bush administration played a secret role in the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.
Peterson's comments were part of a larger story on the disruptive effect of the "birther" movement, people who claim President Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States, and so doesn't meet the constitutional requirement to serve as president.
Republicans say Peterson is ignoring his mainstream constituents.
"My phone, and I'm sure the phones here at the party, have been literally ringing off the hook," said Michael Brodkorb, deputy chairman of the state Republican Party. "I think his remarks will provide an opportunity for a first-tier candidate to get in this race. I think today's the start of a pretty serious campaign against Collin Peterson, and I think the 7th CD just became a heck of a lot more competitive than it previously was."
Brodkorb announced today that his party is running a radio ad critical of Peterson's remarks, as well as his recent votes on the federal budget and climate change.
Peterson apologized on Monday for the remarks he made in the Politico article, and this afternoon he responded to the Republican challenge in a statement issued by his office.
"As for the Republican Party's new ad, I think they can say whatever they want. I'm guessing that my constituents are more interested in cutting the deficit and getting spending under control, and getting a health care bill that works for them and that we can afford," said Peterson. . . .
The Minnesota Republican Party is newly energized after the recent elections of Brodkorb and its new chairman Tony Sutton. They're clearly using Peterson's remarks to open political battles on new fronts.
Republicans lost the 7th District when Peterson defeated embattled incumbent Republican Arlan Stangeland in 1990. Brodkorb says he thinks Peterson is in trouble.
"I think Collin Peterson is going to find himself going forward in the eye of a pretty serious storm," said Brodkorb. "First of all, the activist base is pretty seriously energized because of his statement. I think a lot of candidates that we've not had in the past are going to look toward this race."
The Seventh District Republicans--so energized by their new state leadership team in 2009--do not appear to have yet recruited a candidate--or if they have, that person is pretty sneaky. They have had some killer social media, though, as we noted in a number of posts starting in early August:
In the meantime, Bluestem finds our selves taking comfort in the fact that only twenty-five percent of our fellow citizens on the wind-swept prairies of Minnesota's Seventh District were birthers in 2009. To engage in a bit of placebaiting for a moment, this makes us a bit more grounded than those La-La Landers in Congressman Nunes' district, nestled in Fresno and vicinity.
It's possible that the MN07 birther index has climbed to equal the number of wackadoodles in Nunes' turf, but as a devoted creeper of conservative social media in the area, we're not seeing it. Mostly.
Photo: Representative Collin Peterson, picking and grinning as a member of the Second Amendments, a rootin-tootin bipartisan congressional country cover band. Via Peterson for Congress. Peterson represents Minnesota's sprawling Seventh Congressional District, where people aren't nearly as obsessed with political urban legends as those in central California.
If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
Did everyone notice that all of the kids pictured on the bus postcard are cute white kids?
While that's an alias, we recognized the email address as that of a reader from rural Southern Minnesota who is indeed a grandfather with two grandchildren of color.
Upon reflecting on Grandpa's question, we thought that the graphic design choices made by whomever the Republican-front-group Minnesota Jobs Coalition hired to put its junk mail together probably wasn't from around here.
But rather than basing our post on casual observations drawn from shopping in Willmar, we checked the Minnesota Report Card database online. It's a project of the Minnesota Department of Education that makes all sorts of interesting data available to parents, employers and other interested citizens.
Here's what the demographics for the two public elementary schools in Willmar's public school's look like:
Jeepers, it appears that non-Latino white children are a minority of those kids attending Roosevelt and Kennedy Elementary in Representative Dave Baker's district.
What about the kids in Jeff Backer's district? On the Minnesota Jobs Coalition postcard, they look exactly like the stock photo kids on the Minnesota Jobs Coalition junk mail:
Those child pale in comparison with the demographics in two districts in Backer's tuff--Morris and Backer's home town of Browns Valley:
Morris school kids are about 15 percent children of color, while Traverse County's proximity to the Sisseton Dakota reservation has produced the situation where Sisseton children attend elementary school in Browns Valley, and Browns Valley teens attend high school in South Dakota, according to the Browns Valley Public School District's website.
The real kids on the real buses? Nothing like the junk mail. We do wish that metro conservatives knew what communities are like out on the prairie.
Finally, those stock-photo kids on the school bus make an appearance for Tim Miller, R-Prinsburg, who was also investing on our schools:
Well jeepers.
Here's the demographic data for elementary schools in Montevideo and BOLD (Bird island-Olivia-Lake Lillian-Danube):
And Appleton Elementary and Benson's Northside:
With only a ten-percent enrollment of children of color (8 percent Latino and 2 percent Black), that photo might be appropriate for Benson, but we're pretty sure Milan's thriving Micronesian community is on the bus to Appleton, where fifteen percent of the elementary children enjoy Hispanic heritage.
For additional reading on the Minnesota Jobs Coalition's junk mail campaign, which is also carpet bombing mailboxes in St. Cloud, see our earlier posts:
Images: Postcards from the MJC direct mail campaign and screenshots of demographic profile's from the Minnesota Department of Education Minnesota Report Card database.
We're conducting our November fundraising drive. If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie's original reporting and analysis, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen P.O. Box 108, Maynard MN 56260) or use the paypal button below:
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, serves clients in the business and nonprofit sectors. While progressive in outlook, she does not caucus with any political party.
Recent Comments