Separated At Birth?

Submitted for your review....

On the left is Ben Golnik, formerly of the MN GOP and the MOB's very own Michael Brodkorb of Minnesota Democrats Exposed...or as Rep. Laura Brod called them "The Bobbsey Twins". The last couple of times I have seen these two in the same place at the same time they were also dressed alike so needless to say I had to give them both a rough time.

The photo was taken at Saturday's 2nd Congressional District convention in Northfield where a grand time was had by all.....

The Charges...

On Saturday afternoon, Rep. Mike Beard (R-Shakopee) was on AM 1280's Northern Alliance Radio Network's "The Final Word" talking about the Legislative Auditor Committee's report that Legislative Auditor Jim Nobels would be looking into allegations of mis-management in the AG's office. Rep. Beard went to great lengths to remind listeners that the LA investigation was NOT about the alleged unionization issues...instead, Rep Beard said that the investigation was geared around the allegations of ethics violations that were brought up in Amy Lawler's letter.

In this case, we were really reluctant to get into telling another agency, especially another Constitutional officer who is completely seperate from the Legislature how to run his or her office. If she wants to make people mad and lead to union organization, well I get that's...that's her business - that's not ours. But what began to arise was a point where one of the attorneys came forward and said I was asked to, and in fact many attorneys were demanded that we actually add to...what's the word I'm looking for...affidavits, to file lawsuits before we actually had probable cause to do so just so it could make the 10 o'clock news, take sworn affidavits and add to them after the deputation portion has been finished..and these are really grave ethical lapses...They are very serious charges...and it went so far that the one young attorney, Amy Lawler, and I don't know her and I don't know that young woman I have only seen her work and that letter that she sent to each of our offices...where she said I have been suspended because I raised these issues, this has nothing to do with the unionization effort, this has to do with being asked to misrepresent, lie, cheat and steal...that's when it got even the DFLers attention on the Legislative Audit Commission...

The charges, as laid out by Ms. Lawler in her letter, are as follows:

• being hired with the explicit instruction that the position required loyalty to Attorney General Swanson, and that those advocating for the union were not being loyal.
• being ordered to violate a special master's order.
• being instruction by a supervisor to add statements to a consumer's affidavit that the attorney had reason to believe the consumer did not actually say. The attorney refused, and later resigned.
• being ordered to issue a civil investigative demand against a company when the attorney did not have reasonable cause to believe the company had violated the law. The attorney refused, and later resigned.
• being asked by a supervisor to make a post on the Minnesota Lawyer blog, during the workday from office computers, lauding the Swanson administration. On one specific occasion, a post praising the office appeared under an attorney's name during a time when the attorney was physically in a meeting elsewhere, and could not have made such a post. That attorney later resigned.
• being ordered to tell consumers that they were being invited to meet with the attorney general, and being directed not to tell the consumers that the event was also a press conference.
• being told to give an agency client advice that would not have been in the client's best interest and was not legally sound. The attorney refused and later resigned.
• an instance in which a supervisor inserted information into affidavits that was acutally false; the assistant attorney general removed these statements, and was them subjected to retaliation.

Emphasis added. These are serious charges and if found to be accurate could actually cause Ms. Lawler to loose HER law license should it be found that she did any of these things...even if it were under duress.

The next million dollar question is how to proceed. Rep. Beard continues...

...how then do we proceed with sticking our noses into another duly elected representatives business and investigating her office...one of the things we were concerned about was establishing a precident...taking a vote and ordering him (Auditor Nobels) to have a look...and the Auditor explained to us that he has looked into the Attorney Generals office 3 times already...in 2003...there was that strange deal with American Bankers out of Florida...that Atty General Mike Hatch went after... on two other cases since then, the Legislative Auditor did look into matters in the Attorney Generals office...

OK - so precident IS there for the Legislative Auditor has jurisdiction....what latitude does he have...is this going to be a witch hunt?

...on a bi-partisan basis we agreed that what we didn't want was the disease that seems to afflict Washington where a new administration comes in and Congress immediately enables a special investivator, with a bunch of money and a staff and says happy hunting go find some trouble...we didn't want that to happen so we specifically told Mr. Nobels, do not, if you get into matters where it appears to be a union/management disagreement - that's not our business here..there are processes in place and rules on how those things play out. However if we are getting into a breach of professional ethics, like was alleged with altering affidavits after they have been sworn and filed, if we are into situations where people are ordered to and indeed did file frivilous lawsuits before there was just cause for doing so...if you find these things then Mr. Nobels we trust you to continue to look...we are not giving you license for a witch hunt...

Of course, the next question is if Mr. Nobels does find proof that this happened, who prosecutes the top lawyer in the state?

Deja Vu All Over Again

Here is a hot tip for MADD and our legislature.....

Souksangouane Phengsene, the man convicted of and imprisoned for criminal vehicular homicide after killing Minnesota Timberwolves player Malik Sealy in a
2000 crash, has been jailed once again on suspicion of driving while under the influence.
Phengsene, 51, was in the Hennepin County jail late Sunday in lieu of bail after he was booked at 2 a.m. Sunday on suspicion of driving while intoxicated. He was arrested by the State Patrol.

Instead of reducing the BAC yet again, how about working to keep people like THIS off of the road? It makes sense to just about every common sense working person in the state...

J'accuse!

While looking for examples of coverage of the allegations against AG Lori Swanson versus coverage of US AG Rachel Paulose I found this post from the Minnesota Lawyer Blog. The comments left mirror many of the allegations in Ms. Lawler's letter to Deputy Olson in her letter dated March 14 (and covered in detail by Gary Gross at LFR). The comments are all anonymous, but given what we know so far it is no secret why!

Anonymous said...
I am one of the attorneys who left the AGO for some of the reasons/concerns raised by Ms. Lawler. It is common knowledge in the Office that both Lori Swanson, as well as her predecessor, would often first decide what kind of lawsuits they wanted to bring (commonly based on whatever topic is hot in the media or being pursued by AGs in other states), assume that there MUST be someone operating in Minnesota to sue in this area, direct the staff attorneys to find a party to sue (or give them the names of parties to sue) and file a complaint within X time period and then orchestrate a big media splash and press conference to publicize the matter. While some people might applaud this as being "proactive," I had the same ethical concerns expressed by Ms. Lawler. Of course, my response to these questionable tactics was to simply leave the Office rather than "stir the pot" so to speak and be subject to involuntary reassignment or other retaliation. It is no wonder that the consumer enforcement division at the AGO (now "complex litigation") had 100% turnover in staff attorneys AND managers while I was employed at the Office. Now the staff attorneys who make up that division are primarily very young lawyers who don't have the experience or courage to challenge or question what they are being told to do, with the exception of Ms. Lawler. Kudos to Ms. Lawler for speaking out even though it will obviously cost her her job.

It is sad that the latest public vetting of the problems at the AGO aren't going to change anything (sorry Mr. Cohen). Believe me when I say that Swanson et al. have convinced themselves that they aren't doing anything wrong despite the continued hemorrhaging of attorneys and negative publicity and will defend their tactics to the death (otherwise known as the 2010 election year).

I would say that "hemorrhaging" is the correct term. According to Ms. Lawlers letter (and confirmed with sources close to the pending investigation) 52 lawyers have left the AGO since Lori Swanson took over. Given that the AGO employed 126 lawyers, that means that roughly 41% of the lawyers in that office let. That is a far greater percentage than left the US AGO which is what led to the initial allegations against Rachel Paulose.

Anonymous said...
Mr. Cohen--Having worked in the Minnesota AGO for several years (but no longer), and having worked on multistate cases, I appreciate what you are saying. AGs, like all politicians, prefer favorable press, and I agree that they sometimes may use less than "best practices" in terms of how they pick what cases to file, if they think they can get good press as a result.
However, I also think that Hatch and Swanson have taken that approach to a whole new level, and not a better one. Their attitude towards cases, in my observation, is much like their attitude towards their attorney staff--we were all interchangeable, like cogs in a wheel. And if one cog happened to manifest any independent thought, judgment or to protest (like Ms. Lawler), then the response was to simply remove the offending cog (or get it to quit) and replace it with another one that would do what it was told to do.
All too often, the Hatch and Swanson regimes have the same cavalier, wholly self-serving approach to case management--once the press glamour wore off on a case (which pretty much happened the day it was filed), then upper management lost interest, tended to not want to put appropriate resources towards it, and often drove the case towards settlement to just get rid of it. This didn't happen every single time, of course, but it happened way too often.
And that's what I hope people understand about this union issue--it's not just an employment law issue, as one high-ranking DFL'er has reportedly stated, but it's an issue about the quality of legal services that the State of Minnesota is getting from its own, in-house legal staff. Because if the staff attorneys aren't allowed to act like attorneys and exercise their professional judgment on behalf of their "client," which ultimately, is state agencies and the people of Minnesota, then the people aren't being served. No matter how many cases the AG files in a month.

Emphasis added. These are questions that seem to be getting asked only on blogs. That is what I was getting at in my last post. There are some serious questions being raised and our local media is curiously silent - someone needs to find out why.

If these allegations are indicative of the troubles at the AGO, then a new set of questions arise. How far down the managerial chain does this attitude go? If it is indicative of all of upper management, then who prosecutes this case? For these are the kinds of cases the AGO should be investigating!

Political Double-Standards?

I have never been a fan of unions - I have seen too many abuses (growing up in Chicago) by unions in their attempts to unionize businesses to tend to want to give then any leeway. That is why when the story of AG Lori Swanson's attempts to block the unionization of her office first surfaced, I gave her the benefit of the doubt. That was until Amy Lawler bravely came forward and told her story to the Eric Black at MinnPost and then subsequently was placed on "administrative leave" by the AG's office for doing so. It was at that point that I started paying attention to this case. The local televised media covered Lawler's suspension, but didn't dig any further into the story or her allegations. The Star Tribune devoted a couple of stories to the suspension but didn't dig much either. The St. Paul Pioneer Press didn't cover Lawler's allegations or suspension AT ALL. The only ones that really seemed interested in digging into the allegations raised by Lawler and others were MinnPost, Minnesota Public Radio, Rep. Tom Emmer (R-Delano) who has repeatedly asked Rep. Tony Sertich (DFL-Chisholm) to open legislative hearings on the issue and a multitude of center right blogs like Let Freedom Ring and the lefts favorite Minnesota Democrats Exposed.

Contrast that with the extensive coverage given to Rachel Paulose last fall. The Star Tribune had 20 stories on Paulose versus 7 on the Swanson allegations. KARE 11 was Paulose 22 - Lawler/Swanson 3 counting Friday's announcement of the Legislative Auditor's investigation. WDFL, er WCCO had 50 stories on the Paulose allegations to 3 for Lawler. KSTP had 32 stories on the Paulose allegations versus 4 for the Lawler suspension. Only the PiPress gave almost equal coverage to the stories.

So what is the difference between Lori Swanson and Rachel Paulose? Both are female lawyers who were high profile AG's - one state and on federal. Both are very aggressive - you have to be in their line of work. Both have (according allegations) rather brusque management styles. By all accounts, Ms. Paulose was a competent fairly well liked attorney who made a couple of mistakes and made amends for them. Ms. Swanson, on the other hand, is universally feared by her employees (see next post). She has been accused of asking her employees to falsify time cards, give improper advise to clients, file frivolous lawsuits and generally engage in ethically questionable behavior. So why the disparity in coverage?

The allegations against Ms. Swanson (see LFR where Gary has a copy of the letter sent to Deputy AG Olson), if accurate, are stunning in their scope. The letter is a peek at an office where political power was wielded like a weapon and woe to anyone who questioned the tactics taken or the orders given. It seems to me that this just the kind of story most reporters would give their eye teeth to have dropped in their laps and yet our local media seems curiously silent on the issue. Where are the investigative reporters in this town? Why has NO ONE outside of MinnPost, MPR and the blogosphere done any digging into this story? Why is the local media "covering up" for a DFL State AG when they were so eager to go after a Republican appointee US AG? These are questions that all media consumers need to be asking themselves.

More and more our local media outlets continue to give the impression that they are nothing more than a PR arm for DFL Party. They continue to lose viewers and readers and they don't seem to understand why. While I don't know what it will take for them to finally "get it", I simply can not let slide the most recent example of media bias that Minnesotans have come to expect from their local media.

A bit of housecleaning....I must correct a little sloppiness on my part. Rachel Paulose was not a USAG she was the US Attorney for the District of Minnesota. My apologies for the mistake.

Coleman Campaign Kick Off - Scott County Style

I spent the better part of this morning having breakfast with Senator Norm Coleman and about 100 of his closest friends....in Scott County. Today was the Scott County stop of the Coleman for Senate Kick Off Campaign.

Sen. Coleman was greeted warmly by the supporters - in spite of the early hour (7am). After several minutes of greeting dignitaries (Chamber of Commerce members, Rep Mike Beard HD35A and yours truly) the Senator was introduced by Bruce B. a retired Shakopee resident who spoke about how Senator Coleman helped him get the Social Security Administration to quit taking Medicare Part D premiums (which he cancelled because he was getting insurance through the VA) from his Social Security check. That story was just an example of the many things that Senator Coleman has been able to get done for the state.

Contrary to the DFL talking points (and to the chagrin of a majority of the Republican Party "base") Sen. Coleman has not voted "in-lockstep" with President Bush. For example, Senator Coleman voted not to authorize drilling for oil in ANWAR - something the Bush Administration wanted to do and he voted against the Administration's attempt to close the office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction - an oversight office. He also voted AGAINST the McCain Kennedy Immigration Reform bill - another bill that the Bush Administration favored. However, it is not his voting record with or against the President that I want to highlight. Instead I want to highlight the man behind the votes.

I first met Senator Coleman 4 years ago at a phone bank at the President's re-election headquarters. As a sitting Senator, Sen. Coleman was (of course) trailed by a phalanx of media and handlers. He walked from person to person at the office, shaking hands and chatting briefly with every volunteer. The Junior Logician was with me at the time and when the Senator came to him, he sat down and chatted for almost 5 minutes with the Junior Logician. Today was no different. Today the Senator spoke with Matthew W - a Boy Scout who is working on a Citizenship badge and as part of that is writing a letter to the Senator about illegal immigration. Senator Coleman spent 5 minutes, one on one with Matthew talking about the issue while an obviously proud Mamma W. stood nearby.

During the course of the next 4 years I have seen the Senator at many public forums including the state fair where I saw him interact with a detractor. This person was clearly hostile toward Senator Coleman and his "agenda" but Sen. Coleman smiled and let the man speak and then thanked him for sharing his view with him. Constrast that with how Al Franken treated Peter Fritz at a campaign event last December in Northfield or how he treated Laura Ingraham's producer at the 2004 RNC Convention.

Senator Coleman spent more time talking to individuals this morning than he did making speeches - although he did make a passing reference to a certain someone's problems paying his employees disability and Workman's Comp insurance payments. While people where there to listen to him speak - he was there to hear what his constituents had to say! That is what kind of man Senator Coleman is!

There is a lot more that I can (and will) write about Senator Coleman in his campaign for re-election. However, today's kick-off was a chance for the Senator to do what he does best...touch base with the people he represents.

Swanson-Gate To Be Investigated

Another True North Exclusive

Earlier this morning, the bi-partisan State Legislative Audit Committee (made up of Senators and Representatives including SD 35's own Sen. Claire Robling and Rep. Mike Beard) announced what Gary Gross hinted at in his post last night. They are requesting that the non-partisan Legislative Auditor look into allegations that Attorney General Swanson engaged in possibly illegal union busting activities. Michael Brodkorb and Drew Emmer have been leading the charge from the blogosphere and have done a ton of good investigation into these allegations. Keep an eye on their respective blogs for more details as they come to light.

Overheard At The Capital

A source in the Capital told me today that Rep. Ron Erhardt (R?-Edina) will announce at the end of this Legislative session that he will run for re-election this year as an Independent. This has not been confirmed with the Representative's office but this certainly explains why his campaign website has been down for the last week.

Stay tuned to True North and Ladies Logic for updates.

Live Blogging Senate File 3309

OK - I'm back and they just voted on the A46 Amendment. Since I have no idea what it was about, I will just report that it not adopted 22-41.

Senator Vandeveer just put up the A50 amendment. It is to strike 125 plans from the bill. Apparently this is supported by small businesses. The amendment was not adopted 15-47.

I will not liveblog all the amendments....if there is anything interesting I will report back and the live blog debate on the amended bill.

Sen. VanDeVeer has an amendment up to remove the health reinvestment assessment (A49). He made a remark during the debate about how Minnesota is the only state that seems to think raising taxes in a down economy is a good thing. Needless to say the amendment was not adopted - 15 to 47.

Sen. Erickson Ropes is correct....an assessment is A TAX! Didn't we (as a state) learn our lesson last year with the "health impact fee"?????

Sen. Hann puts up an amendment to pull the BMI monitoring in children in the schools out of the bill. Roll call vote has been called. Sen. Bergland says that this is the "only" way to monitor how well the program is succeeding???? Ummmmm - and the doctors won't be monitoring that Senator????? Amendment was not adopted 22-44.

Debate on the bill has begun....Sen. Ortman called this a fraud being foisted on the state. She pointed out that the bill gives taxing authority to an UNACCOUNTABLE, UNELECTED bureaucrat - over the House and over the Senate and over the people!

Sen. Bergland calls this market based????? In what alternate universe??

Sen Hann the Senate to task for the intrusion into Joe and Jane Citizens life. He said that the government should not be in the business of telling people what activities they can and can not participate in (staying home reading versus walking 5 miles) and what they can and can not eat. He also expresses puzzlement at Sen. Bergland calling this bill "market based"...

The bill is passed 41-22.

"I Told You So"

During the last legislative session, many folks on the "right" were trying to put the brakes on the spending spree that the DFL led legislature (and the Governor to be fair) were going on. Well in light of the deficit, some are (correctly I might add) saying "I told you so"(scroll down to the Guest Commentary).

One year ago the economy was doing well and the Legislature was overflowing with ideas on how to spend the $2.2 billion state budget surplus. It was the first time in several years that we weren't facing a large deficit. A new cast of leaders was eager to validate its sweeping victory in the 2006 election by turning their campaign promises into promises kept.
In the midst of the spending frenzy, I wrote to constituents my belief that "we need to be prudent with spending and not leave ourselves in a tough situation if the economy takes a sudden downturn." There was at the time plenty of historical evidence to suggest such a downturn could take place.

The legislative update referenced above can be found here. Rep. Beard goes on to say:

However, the new legislative leadership had a different view and they pursued their spending agenda. Given their large majorities in the House and the Senate, that is certainly their right. Assuming that the $2.2 billion surplus would fund it, they grew the state budget to $34.5 billion. Doing so left us vulnerable to the exact situation we find ourselves in today.

I said before and I'll say it again, the reason for this can be summed up in one little number...85! Giving the DFL an overwhelming majority of the House and overwhelming control in the Senate has given us what we have today. Staying home is not an option. We simply must recruit and support good conservatives, like Reps. Beard and Buesgens in SD35. We can not afford to lose good folks like this. We also need to make sure that we find more good folks like this for the 85 other seats and work like heck to get them elected as well.

The time is now. What are you waiting for?

An Afternoon Funny!

You're Not Exactly a Hippie...

While you're not a hippie, you've got the spirit of one. Like most hippies, you have deep beliefs and unusual interests. You may not buy into hippie fashions, music, or heavy drug use. But at heart, you are a free spirit and suspicious of the status quo.

Are You a Hippie?

HT Il Duce who is definitely NOT a hippie!

From the In Box.

We got the following today from a reader that is in response to Margaret Martin's post "Free Towing for Welfare Recepients"

I live in Rep Jeremy Kalins district and was very upset to read the article by Margaret Martin dated 3/11/08, in which he was quoted as saying, "welfare recipients are the real working people of minnesota, because they are trying to get to the top of the economic food heap". I shared that article with several of my customers, and a friend of mine faxed kalin the article. Please read the response that was recieved....
Dear _________, Thanks for your fax and the opportunity to correct the record. The quote was entirely fabricated by the republican caucus. I did not say it or anything close to it. Further, the amandment does not do anything close to providing "free towing for welfare recipients". In fact, the only way that small provision in my amendment would be relevent would be if somebody abandoned his or her vehicle in the tow lot.
Thanks for the opportunity to correct the record. One of my mottos is "In God we
trust, everyone else needs to bring the data".

Margaret was very clear in the post that this was an "off mike" remark and that she was getting this information second hand.

Here is an annotated transcript that was forwarded to me today of the discussion
during that interval of the House floor session on May 10, 2007:...
Note: When Rep. Seifert said "if you are on some type of public relief program, and
you don't scoop your vehicle out and it gets towed, you kind of get treated differently than if you are someone who works," Rep. Kalin shook his head. And when there was a brief break in the action ten seconds later, Rep. Kalin said aloud, "welfare recipients are the real working people of Minnesota, because they are trying to get to the top of the economic heap." It is not on the tape, but it was heard. And it is consistent with Rep. Kalin's underlined comments that are noted above.

Rep. Kalin contacted us asking that the post be removed. An email was sent to Rep. Kalin's official email address today asking if he would be interested in offering a response to the post. We will be posting his response as soon as we get it and we will also be more than happy to hear from anyone who may have heard the remarks that were made, off mike, on the House floor.

Cross posted from True North to allow comments!

Ditching the "Emote" Control

Yesterday, Jazz Shaw and I had the distinct pleasure of again talking to author Barbara Oakley about her book "Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed and My Sister Stole My Mother's Boyfriend". Barbara has been our guest on more than one occasion and every time her insight has been eye opening to say the least.

Yesterday's discussion was on the concept of the "emote" control....the concept where people base their reactions to issues on emotion rather than on fact or logic. It is a concept that we see every day, especially in discussion on "hot button" issues like abortion or gun control. Neither side holds the monopoly on the "emote control" as we discussed yesterday. In the book, Ms. Oakley relates a conversation that she had with the captain of a Russian fishing trawler that she was working on at the time.

“The terrible things your own people say about their country,” said Captain Shevchenko one night as we sat up drinking after another late night trawl was tucked into the hold. “No self-respecting person should ever say things like that about where they live. Not if they have any respect for their history and their culture and their race. Not if they have any patriotism.”
“You can’t teach patriotism,” I began.
But Shevchenko interrupted contemptuously, as if I’d just drooled. “Of course you can teach patriotism. We do it all the time.”
The conversation rolled on, but that part of it stuck, bothering me.
I remembered dozens of one-sided tipsy Slavic arguments, which from the Soviet’s perspective involved clear-cut dichotomies of good against evil. Excessive Western personal freedom, for example, versus sacred duty to the state. All-pervasive Western drug addiction versus minor Russian drinking habits (not quite!). The wicked American invasion of Vietnam versus the high-minded Russian invasion of Afghanistan, which was solely for the good of the Afghans.
I could see the crumbling decay of the Soviet Empire all around me, from the rotten fish processing plant below decks, to the hollow eyed fear of the political commissar and the KGB, to the “who cares” attitude toward work, to the rampant alcoholism of the crew. But despite the all-pervasive rot, it was a rare Russian who could see—much less admit to—any problem with the system of government.

It is then that she introduces the concept of the "emote control" and links it politics and how defenders of both sides use it to justify every action of "their guy".

A recent imaging study by psychologist DrewWesten and his colleagues at Emory University provides firm support for the existence of emotional reasoning. Just prior to the 2004 Bush-Kerry presidential elections, two groups of subjects were recruited—fifteen ardent Democrats and fifteen ardent Republicans. Each was presented with conflicting and seemingly damaging statements about their candidate, as well as about more neutral targets such as actor Tom Hanks (who, it appears, is a likeable guy for people of all political persuasions).
Unsurprisingly, when the participants were asked to draw a logical conclusion about a candidate from the other—“wrong”—political party, the participants found a way to arrive at a conclusion that made the candidate look bad, even though logic should have mitigated the particular circumstances and allowed them to reach a different conclusion.

We saw an example of there here just this week, where a commentor chose to respond to remarks I made with the standard "well your guys are just as bad" rather than looking at the facts presented.

Now I will not be so bold as to say that I have not engaged in that behavior myself, but it is a habit that I am trying to break myself of. It is, however, a habit that we ALL need to break ourselves of if we are ever going to get past the bitter divide that we find ourselves in currently.

It's not easy, but it is past time. We need to ditch the "emote control" and get back to dealing with facts and logic. Then maybe we can come together and really move on with doing the people's business.

Hang On To Your Wallets

Hang on to your wallets friends - the Legislature is back in session. Easter break is over and the DFL led legislature is rarin' to go...ready to spend more of your money!

The latest in the long list of taxation bills is HF 4103 - Rep. Lenczewski's bill to "help" balance the spending shortfall. Rep. Lenczewski implies that the burden of this bill will be business, but what the press and Rep. Lenczewski don't tell you is that the quintessential Minnesota cabin is also in the sights of "the taxman".

4.6 Subdivision 1. Levy amount. The state general levy is levied against
4.7commercial-industrial property and seasonal residential recreational property, as defined
4.8in this section. The state general levy base amount is $592,000,000 for taxes payable in
4.92002. For taxes payable in subsequent years, the levy base amount is increased each year
4.10by multiplying the levy base amount for the prior year by the sum of one plus the rate of
4.11increase, if any, in the implicit price deflator for government consumption expenditures
4.12and gross investment for state and local governments prepared by the Bureau of Economic
4.13Analysts of the United States Department of Commerce for the 12-month period ending
4.14March 31 of the year prior to the year the taxes are payable. The tax under this section is
4.15not treated as a local tax rate under section 469.177 and is not the levy of a governmental
4.16unit under chapters 276A and 473F.

Now, the Logical Household is one of the FEW in this state that does not own a "seasonal recreational property". While we do enjoy the "cabin life", we just never got to the point where we felt comfortable taking out that second mortgage to buy a cabin. However, for many working families, the lake cabin is something that has been passed from generation to generation...a way for a scattered family to get together and reconnect. They have made the sacrifices to keep the property for their children and great-grandchildren to enjoy. Rep. Lenczewski has decided that you do not pay enough in property taxes on your first home and your cabin so she is proposing that the rates that you pay on that cabin be raised and treated as "commercial property".

How do you think you will be able to afford to pay the taxes on your cabin when your jobs are taxed out of existance. Employers like 3M (remember the three "M's stand for MINNESOTA Mining and Manufacturing) are already leaving the state due to the threat of ever increasing taxes and regulations from the Legislature.

I will be following this bill through committee and I will bring you updates (like the updates for HF 3391) as they come out of committee. Stay tuned and be ready to call your legislator.

Update From Forest Lake Part 2

Sgt H from Nine-Sixteenths blog has a report from the Forest Lake VFW.

Anyway, I made it to the rescheduled event in Forest Lake but only caught the last hour of he event and heard David Bellavia speak. He gave a pretty good speech about how war and combat aren't partisan events. He, and I, went to war with Republicans and Democrats. Seventy-seven Senators and 296 congressmen of both political parties voted to authorize force in Iraq. The VFF message is that regardless of political affiliation that we need to stay and win in Iraq. Three quarters of both houses of congress voted to send the military into harms way, and the government needs to honor the sacrifices the military has made while carrying out the national policy.

Do I need to tell you to go read the whole thing?

Profiles In Courage

In 1954/55, John Fitzgerald Kennedy wrote the classic book "Profiles In Courage" which became required reading for school kids when I was growing up. Needless to say, Steve Massey will never be on any list of courageous leaders.

A national tour featuring decorated veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan won't be stopping at Forest Lake Area High School today as planned, after school leaders abruptly canceled the visit.
Steve Massey, the school principal, said the decision to cancel was prompted by concerns that the event was becoming political rather than educational and therefore was not suitable for a public school.

When given the opportunity to come on a local radio program to explain his reasoning, he gave the producer of the program a curt "No" before hanging up on him. Not exactly courageous.

It is so nice to know that the same soldiers that fought so hard for the right for people to protest are not allowed the same free speech that the protesters so freely enjoy - at least in this principal's eyes.

Many are saying that the protests would have been a "disruption" to the school day. That is a complete and total red herring. In a post Columbine/Red Lake School/Virginia Tech era, you can not simply walk into a public school unchallenged. Doors are locked during the day so that visitors go in through the main entrance where there is usually someone to sign you in and get you, IN THE MOST DIRECT MANNER, to the school office. People who do not have legit business in the school are generally not allowed past the office or checkpoint and even then...For example, if I were to go to the Junior Logician's school to pick him up, I must wait for him in the office. Even though I am a parent, I am simply not allowed to walk the halls during the school day!

In an interview with Chris Baker on KTLK - Pete Hegseth, founder of VFF, said that there were parameters set so that the discussion would not turn "political". The ONLY ones who were making this political were (according to Hegseth) were the DU and Vets for Peace who were from outside the district who were trying to cause trouble (Chief is already prowling the halls of the Underground looking for good examples) to post.

Whether he realizes it or not, Principal Massey taught these kids a horrible lesson today. He taught them that honor and valor are things to be avoided at all costs. He taught these kids that the adults that are in charge of teaching them how to be adults can not stand up for the basic principles of this country. He taught them that a few malcontents can keep you from doing the "right thing". He taught them that our military men and women did something that they should be ashamed of.

Principle Massey is the one who should be ashamed.....

Raising The Bar

It is not often that you see a blogger fisking something on their own site (unless you read Anti-Strib regularly that is) however there are times when it is necessary and today is one of them.
I put up a post yesterday on the Bureaucratic Nightmare that Sara Jane Olson (aka Kathleen Soliah) found herself in over the weekend. An anonymous commentor left the following in response to my post (profanity redacted and spelling is left uncorrected - as much as it pained me to do so)

And can you imagine having those people in charge of you ROADS and BRIDGES?!?!?
They'd like, be crashing down all over the f*****g place!
And your national defense? They'd be going to war against the PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T CRASH JETS INTO OUR BUILDINGS!!!
Can you imagine such ineptitude?
Holy s***, I'm glad we have people in charge who can fix our really big problems. Whew.

What Anonymous doesn't realize is that he/she made my point and then opened a new one! My larger point was that the government is tasked with certain jobs and if they can not do those jobs properly why in the name of all that is holy would we give them something even more important (our health care) to be in charge of?

But Anonymous opened up another subject...the propensity of people who would rather score political points instead of reasoning an issue out. Here is a person who obviously cares about the issues who is more concerned with saying "yeah well your side screwed it up too" then he/she is about actually FIXING the problem. The larger problem here is that our government IS messed up. You have legislators who have no respect for the people....who actually believe that the people who voted them in to office are too inept or too dumb to take care of their own family. However, these hyper-partisans would rather trash the other side or attack the messenger than they are in fixing the problem.

One of the many reasons why I got into blogging was because I really would like to be able to change the level of discourse. It is part of the reason why I chose my nom de plume. I wanted to make sure that my conversations (via the blog) were held in a manner that would make my grandmother proud. I also firmly believe that if we can get past the hyper-partisanship that we will be able to solve the real problems that are facing Minnesota today.

So my challenge to all of my readers and my fellow citizens is this - raise the bar. If you firmly believe that Universal Health Care is a good thing, tell us why. If you firmly believe that the City of Columbia Heights would fall without a new bicycle bridge (HF 3226) - tell us why. If you firmly believe that money for the Crookston Ice Arena project (HF 2916) is more important than fixing failing bridges - tell us why. Don't engage in ad hominem attacks...give us the reason. It is only then that we can get to the business of fixing what is wrong with our state and our country.

Do we have a deal?

Bureaucratic Nightmares

Sarah Jan Olson (aka Kathleen Soliah) is going back to prison. (HT Lassie)

Just days after being told she could serve her parole in Minnesota, Olson is back in a California prison, where she'll stay for almost another year.
California Corrections Department officials said Saturday that criticism of Olson's release spurred a review of her case. That review showed that her parole date had been miscalculated -- she was not supposed to be released until March 17, 2009.

This is just one more example of the type bureaucratic inneptitude that runs rampant in big government. Do you really want to give bureaucrats like this - who can not perform simple math - control of YOUR healthcare????? I know I don't!

The New Media Dilemma

I recently threw a couple of snarky posts up recently about how the media is "in the bag" for Barak Obama. However after reading this piece by Michael Barone, I realized that there is a little more depth to the issue than just whether the "dead tree" media is in the bag for any one person or another...

For Obama's candidacy is a generational phenomenon. His greatest support comes from black voters and from voters under 30, the Millennial generation born after 1980, first named by William Strauss and Neal Howe...The Wright sermons have probably not been a problem for Obama with black voters -- they have heard this kind of thing before. And while it may be off-putting, it will not prompt them to reconsider their votes or diminish their enthusiasm.
Millennials are another matter. In a brilliantly well-timed new book, "Millennial Makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the Future of American Politics," Democratic Party veteran Morley Winograd and media researcher Michael Hais explain how this generation, with the highest percentages of blacks, Latinos and Asians in American history, doesn't care much for racial divisions and relies for news and advice on networks of friends and peers.
A newspaper story on Obama's pastor is not going to affect their view of him -- they don't read newspapers except when a friend emails a link to a newspaper Website. A YouTube video is another thing.
The Wright videos -- angry when Obama is soothing, racially divisive when Obama is inclusive, anti-American when Obama proclaims a new generation's version of patriotism -- are something else.

This does bring up the debate (again) of the impact of old versus new media. While Boomers like myself and Gen Xers are using the new media more and more, the new media is a media that is geared specifically toward Millenials. However, before all of you candidates jump on to the new media bandwagon, remember the lesson of Howard Dean! You can not count on millenials to remain motivated enough to get to the polls on election day. However, that is not to say that they won't come out if properly motivated, as we saw with Congressman Ron Paul's candidacy. Congressman Paul figured out how to get Millenials, Boomers and Gen X'ers excited about him and excited about being part of the process by reminding them that their voices are very important. A smart candidate (or party) will figure out how to use that to their advantage.

This election will be won by the candidate (or party) who can best figure out how to best utilize both the old and new media in a way that truly spans the generations. The new media is here to stay and the old media is too entrenched to ever really go away and I for one, would not want it any other way. After all, who would bloggers have to complain about if the old media ever completely went away?

Hang 'Em High

Much was said in recent weeks about the "punishment" that has been meted out to the "Over-ride Six". Now we see that they are not the only ones being "punished" by the folks back home.

There were no embarrassing scandals or ugly fights at the House District 58 convention last weekend, but, still, two longtime incumbents -- Reps. Joe Mullery in 58A and Willie Dominguez in 58B -- walked away without getting the official nod from their own party. Instead, activists in 58B chose Bobbie Joe Champion, and Wellstone Action staffer and Minneapolis School Board Member Peggy Flanagan forced Mullery to a no-endorsement, kicking off a primary race.

Here you have two DFL incumbents who have voted pretty much in lock step with their caucus and yet they could not regain the endorsement of their BPOU.

I expect Lori Sturdevant's scathing indictment of the SD 58 convention to be in the Star Tribune in coming days......NOT.

HF 3391 - It's UNIVERSAL!

Here is the “universal” part of on HF 3391. Specifically I would like to focus on Article 5 Section 12.

45.5 Sec. 12. [62U.06] GOALS FOR UNIVERSAL COVERAGE; CONTINGENT
45.6 INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENT.
45.7 Subdivision 1. Phase-in goals. The state's phase-in goals for progress toward
45.8 universal health coverage for Minnesota residents are:
45.9 (1) 94 percent insured by end of fiscal year 2009;
45.10 (2) 96 percent insured by end of fiscal year 2011;
45.11 (3) 97 percent insured by end of fiscal year 2012; and
45.12 (4) 98 percent insured by end of fiscal year 2013 and thereafter.
45.13 Subd. 2. Measurement of percent insured.The determination of the percent
45.14 of Minnesota residents insured must be based on an annual survey of the Minnesota
45.15 population younger than age 65 to be conducted or contracted for by the commissioner
45.16 of health which must include questions related to the type of insurance, amount of
45.17 cost-sharing, and potential barriers to public program enrollment.
45.18 Subd. 3. Contingent individual responsibility requirement. (a) If the increased
45.19 affordability, cost containment, insurance reform, and voluntary efforts provided for
45.20 under this act fail to achieve universal coverage, an individual responsibility requirement
45.21 must have been proven to be necessary.
45.22 (b) If any one of the phase-in goals specified in subdivision 1 for fiscal year 2011 or
45.23 later is not met, as determined by the commissioner of health, in spite of implementation
45.24 of the increased affordability, cost containment, insurance reform, and voluntary efforts
45.25 provided for under sections 62U.01 to 62U.09, an individual responsibility requirement,
45.26 requiring every Minnesota resident to obtain and maintain health coverage from a public
45.27 or private sector source of the person's choice, must become effective 12 months after the
45.28 end of that fiscal year, provided that the commissioner certifies that health plans that meet
45.29 the affordability standard under section 62U.08 are available to Minnesotans.
45.30 (c) Failure to comply with the individual responsibility requirement is not a crime,
45.31 but must subject the person to a financial penalty to be specified in law.

There it is…..the “Devil” in the details…..Universal Care! According to this bill, the legislature wants to take over health care for 98% of ALL Minnesota residents by 2013. This is a change in earlier language (in the bill). Earlier language in the bill talks about how this is coverage for only those Minnesotans who are on specific already existing plans. The authors go to great pains to make sure that it is spelled out (in earlier sections) that the “universality” is for people who are on MN Care and Medicare and Medicaid! So now when you take this language and go back up to Article 1 Section 1. Note the difference between line 1.24 and line 45.8.

1.23 Subdivision 1. Selection of primary care clinic.Beginning January 1, 2009, the
1.24 commissioner shall require state health care program enrollees eligible for services
1.25 under the fee-for-service system to select a primary care clinic or medical group, within
1.26 two months of enrollment. Beginning July 1, 2009, the commissioner shall encourage
1.27 enrollees who have a complex or chronic condition to select a primary care clinic or
1.28 medical group with clinicians who have been certified as health care homes under section
1.29 256B.0751, subdivision 3. The commissioner and county social service agencies shall
2.1 provide enrollees with lists of primary care clinics, medical groups, and clinicians certified
2.2 as health care homes, and shall establish a toll-free number to provide enrollees with
2.3 assistance in choosing a clinic, medical group, or health care home.

Up until line 45.8, the talk was all about “program enrollees eligible for services” That all changes in 45.8….now it reads “Minnesota Residents”. Understand that THIS MEANS YOU. If you have employer provided health care you will still be required to register with a state primary care clinic (or health care home) and you will be required to undergo an initial screening in order to determine whether you have a “chronic condition” (including obesity) that requires long term care. Realize that this means that no matter whether you pay for your own insurance or not, you are still going to eventually be brought under the umbrella of state run health care and instead of your insurance company getting your premium payments, the STATE WILL. Also realize that this means your premiums will go UP and that rate will be mandated by the State!

27.8 Subd. 3. Premium rate restrictions. No individual health plan may be offered,
27.9 sold, issued, or renewed to a Minnesota resident unless the premium rate charged is
27.10 determined in accordance with the following requirements:

AND the State will tell your employer what kind of policy that they are required to provide to you (start reading lines 29.4 thru 31.23) and what your employer can contribute.

Realize that the department of health will have a scant 4 months to put this together by mandate and that the effective date of this bill would be January 1 2009! This drastic, rapid take over of one of the few healthy segments of the Minnesota economy right now will further deepen the recession that we find ourselves in today.

There is still time to stop this, my friends. HF 3391 is still in committee (next stop the Health and Human Services Finance Division) and is subject to being amended. Call your legislator, call your Senator (SF 3099 is the companion bill to HF 3391) and most importantly call Governor Pawlenty and urge them to defeat this bill.

WELCOME Hot Air readers. Pull up a chair and stay a while.

HF 3391 - You Want WHAT TEST?

One of the continuing themes, in my build up toward Universal Health Care has been the documentation of the rationing of services that starts once the government starts paying for your "free" health care. The posts in question can be found here. Commenters and politicians and reporters assure us that nothing like that will ever happen here, but are they correct? If Article 5 Section 10 is any indication.....

42.14 Sec. 10. [62U.05] HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT.
42.15 Subdivision 1.Technology Advisory Committee. (a) The Health Care
42.16 Transformation Commission shall convene an advisory committee to make
42.17 recommendations to the commission regarding the inclusion of new and existing health
42.18 technologies to the standard benefit set and design.
42.19 (b) The advisory committee shall be made up of 11 members appointed by the
42.20 commission, in consultation with the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, the
42.21 Health Services Advisory Council, and the University of Minnesota. The members shall
42.22 consist of:
42.23 (1) six practicing physicians licensed under chapter 147; and
42.24 (2) five other practicing health care professionals who use health technology in
42.25 their scope of practice.
42.26 (c) No member of the advisory committee shall have a substantial financial interest
42.27 in a health technology company or be employed by or under contract with a health
42.28 technology manufacturer during their term or for 18 months before their appointment.
42.29 (d) The members shall be immune from civil liability for any official acts performed
42.30 in good faith as members of the committee.
42.31 (e) The advisory committee shall be governed under section 15.059, except that
42.32 the committee shall not expire. Upon the expiration of the Health Care Transformation
42.33 Commission, the Health Technology Assessment Committee shall continue to exist under
42.34 the oversight of the Minnesota Health Insurance Exchange.
43.1 Subd. 2. Technology selection process. The commission, in consultation with the
43.2 advisory committee, shall select existing and new health technologies to be reviewed by
43.3 the committee. In making a selection, priority must be given to any technology for which:
43.4 (1) there are concerns about its safety, efficacy, or cost effectiveness;
43.5 (2) actual or expected expenditures are high due to demand for the technology,
43.6 its cost, or both; and
43.7 (3) there is adequate evidence available to conduct a complete review.
43.8 Subd. 3. Technology review. (a) Upon the selection of a health technology for
43.9 review, the committee shall contract for a systematic evidence-based assessment of
43.10 the technology's safety, efficacy, and cost effectiveness. The contract must be with an
43.11 evidence-based practice center designated as such by the federal agency for health care
43.12 research and quality, or another appropriate entity as designated by the commission.
43.13 (b) The committee shall provide notification to the public when a health technology
43.14 has been selected for review. The notification must indicate when that review is to be
43.15 initiated and how an interested party may submit evidence or provide public comment for
43.16 consideration during the review.
43.17 Subd. 4.Committee determination. (a) Upon reviewing the completed assessment
43.18 and any other evidence submitted regarding the safety, efficacy, and cost effectiveness of
43.19 the technology, the committee shall recommend to the commission:
43.20 (1) the conditions, if any, under which the health technology should be included
43.21as a covered benefit; and
43.22 (2) if covered, the criteria to be used to decide whether the technology is medically
43.23 necessary, or proper and necessary treatment.
43.24 (b) The commissioners of human services, employee relations, and corrections may
43.25 use the committee's recommendation in making coverage and reimbursement decisions,
43.26 unless the recommendation conflicts with an applicable federal statute or regulation

Can I just say one thing.....I TOLD YOU SO!

If you that getting your HMO to approve experimental treatments (under todays existing market based system) is bad just wait until you have to argue for that care in front of a board of doctors who are accountable to the Legislature and not to you and your health.

Busy Days

Sorry for the lack of output yesterday - I spent the majority of the day dealing with personal issues. I am finishing up taxes today so there won't be much output until much later today or early tomorrow. I do promise to get a post up very soon on the lastest version of the Health Care Bill (HF 3391). Massive changes were made in committee that you should be aware of.

In Defense of Rev. Wright

Stay with me here guys....


In one of his more controversial sermons, embattled Trinity United Church of Christ retiring pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright said that God "d*mn" America line because "America is killing innocents" everyday and that government forces are still working to keep black enslaved. He has a point - but not in the way that he thinks he does....

America is killing innocents daily - approximately 126,000 (correction - that is a worldwide number - the actual number of US abortions is "only" 3700 a day - thanks to reader David H for the correction) innocent babies are murdered every day in utero in America's abortion clinics! Is that the sign of a blessed country? Many, myself included, would argue that it is not.

38% of African American families are indeed enslaved....trapped in a welfare system that encourages them to rely on a benevolent master to provide them with food, housing and other "necessities". The benevolent master in this case is a nanny government that demands that those who take "masters" largess surrender themselves to living in a manner that the "master" dictates. No you are not allowed to take a job to better yourself...if you do that, you lose your government check! For some people, that means that they don't have access to affordable daycare in order to go to work. In others, that means that they lose their "affordable" housing. How affordable is housing, if it can be taken away from you at the whim of a government bureaucrat somewhere (no the current credit crunch does not fit in here).

If Rev. Wright were really interested in enacting "social justice" as opposed to assuaging the guilt of his parishioners who somehow feel like they have "cheated" in order to get ahead, then he would be working for a systemic change in welfare laws that would allow for a plan to help people get to work and become productive citizens - to get them out of the slavery of welfare. If he really cared about the "slaughtered innocents" he would be working to close the abortion clinics in his neighborhood.

If Rev. Wright really cared about social justice....he'd be working for the McCain Campaign. Instead he is working for a candidate that proposes further enslavement of all Americans....enslavement to a government that wants to dictate what we eat, what doctors to see and when and how much profit "massa" makes off of our labors. Does that sound like justice to you?

Thirteen Months Ago

Thirteen months ago, we had a $2.2 Billion surplus. This year - we are $935 million dollars in the hole. What has happened in that time? The DFL had just been given the reins of power and they went on a drunken spending spree.....

To all of you "conservatives" who stayed home in 2006 in order to "teach the party a lesson" I hope that you are proud of yourselves.