News Feeds
House Rules Committee on Unallotment- Full Meeting Part 2
Description:
House Rules Committee on Unallotment, Second Part on November 16th 2009.
House Rules Committee on Unallotment -Full Meeting Part 1
Description:
House Rules Committee on Unallotment lawsuite on November 16th, 2009.
House Rules Vote Says Governor Violated Law
Description:
Representative Al Juhnke (DFL) sums up the reasons why the House Rules Committee voted to file a "friend of the court" brief in support of Deanna Brayton, et al vs Tim Pawlenty on the Governor's unallotment of funds after the 2009 legislative session.
Is There A Threat To Unite Us? 8 DFL Governor Candidates Respond.
Description:
By Craig Stellmacher
"What is the greatest threat to Minnesota right now, that we can all unite around, and what will be your strategy to solve this problem?"
Eight DFL Candidates for Governor, answer that question on Sunday 11/15 2009. Minnesota House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher; State Senator Thomas Bakk; Former US Senator Mark Dayton; Former State Senator Steve Kelly, State Senator John Marty, State Representative Tom Rukavina, Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, and State Representative Paul Thissen, have all come to the Eagle's Club at 2507 E 25 th St in Minneapolis Minnesota to talk to the DFL Senior Caucus Inside. One room had the Vikings game on, and there were 150 DFL'rs in the second room, so we briefly go outside to answer the same question.
For the last several years, I've been looking at Game Theory, also known as Strategy Theory. Note, humans have a tendency to come together when they share the same threat. If the sky was filled with UFO's with purple death rays, we'd unite with Iran and North Korea till they were gone.
I've noted recently, that some politicians actually say there's a group that threatens them. The first example I can think of here in Minnesota is US Representative Michele Bachmann, she states that a group the size of hers, "Liberals", threatens the existence of her group. It will be hard for her to get a majority of the votes, while she accuses half of threatening her, the half she names have no reason to vote for her. I think some politicians master this idea, and I can think of Reagan, Clinton and Obama, who got the American people to unite around a threat or an idea.
I was looking for this uniting, in any of their answers. If a politician states : "we all share the same threat", I think it will be easier for them to get a majority of the people. This uniting strategy, is rather powerful in the long run, but we have many examples in the last few years we can think of either with politicians or with TV pundits that urge us to divide ourselves and say near half--threaten our existence.
Bachmann's strategy works, because she has a base she can appeal to in her district, but she would have trouble getting elected state or nation wide. Those that appeal to all with : "We all should unite, because we all have the same threat"--have a stronger strategy. They can get more votes, and they can get more done once elected. These answers are presented in alphabetical order.
All answers, identify threats, but several really call out uniting around the problem. They point to the current strategy as wrong, and they look to unite to solve this problem. Bakk, Kelly, and Marty really go after our incorrect current divisive strategy in their answer. They strongly want to unite, this could be key in getting elected state wide, and in then solving our problems together once elected.
Minnesota House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher : Thinks current leadership lacks vision, and she wants to focus on education, and the economic development plan.
State Senator Thomas Bakk : The Budget, is not the biggest problem, it's our entire economy. Then, he suggests uniting different groups to work together, he wants to be a "uniter". He certainly addresses the strategy of uniting around a common problem.
Former US Senator Mark Dayton : 4 issues : Jobs, Education, Fair Share Taxes, and Single Payer Health Care.
Former State Senator Steve Kelly : "We currently feel we can't get things done--working together", he thinks our strategy is the problem and repeatedly he states he will try to bring people together.
State Senator John Marty : "We have to bring our state together". He talks about uniting and strategy specifically, and he uses as an example health care where we should unite and solve the problem together.
State Representative Tom Rukavina : For him, it's the un-allotment and the unconstitutional actions which he thinks are more for the benefit of Governor Tim Pawlenty, than for Minnesota.
Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak : We have to create jobs, train workers, develop and build, with the proper leadership.
State Representative Paul Thissen : "Our greatest threats could be our greatest opportunity...", problems he wishes to turn around. He sees big changes with the :1) Age Wave 2) Environmental Changes 3) World Economy, Thissen describes complex problems, with complex positive pay-offs if solved.
All identify Minnesota problems, and offer solutions. But Bakk, Kelly and Marty stress uniting to solve them.
Capitol Report - Fighting Foreclosures
Description:
Another spike in foreclosures is predicted and lawmakers continue efforts to mitigate the potential effects. Julie Bartkey talks about possible legislation with Senators Linda Scheid and Ray Vandeveer. Minnesota Housing Partnership Executive Director Chip Halbach provides an overview on housing trends in the state.
Governor Pawlenty Campaigns In Iowa
Description:
Governor Tim Pawlenty campaigns in Iowa on Saturday November 7, 2009.
"No Torture" Statement Draws Protests To Condoleezza Rice Speech
Description:
Story by Matt Johnson
Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice arrived in the Twin Cities tonight to find a couple of dozen protesters outside where she was speaking at the Beth El Synagogue in St Louis Park.
The protesters were upset that Rice had said the US did not support torture even though prisoners were tortured while Rice served during the Bush administration.
I spoke with Chuck who is ashamed that his synagogue would invite Dr Rice to speak here. He has crafted a letter to the FBI asking that Dr. Rice be investigated for conspiracy to commit torture.
The letter cites a youtube video where she was questioned on if she thought water boarding was torture. The letter. sent to the FBI, was carbon copied to the U S attorney for the District of Minnesota.
I also spoke with Robert who laments that human beings have not learned to avoid war and still torture each other. He says the US has broken international law by torturing it's detainees.
Robert is also being charged in a Burnsville incident where during a similar protest, the police said he was honking his horn in violation of the law.
A You Tube video of Dr. Rice's torture statement can be found here
Matt Johnson reporting for The Uptake on Sunday November 8th 2009.
Health Care Bill "Not Perfect", But Rep. Oberstar Supports
Description:
Congress is working late tonight debating an historic health care reform bill. Congressman Jim Oberstar (DFL-MN) points out the bill is not perfect, but outlines why he supports it.
Madame Speaker, I have been a proponent of a national health care system as long as I have been in Congress, today we take a bold step towards that goal.
America has the finest doctors, the latest medical equipment, and cutting edge technology that is the envy of the world. But millions of Americans cannot access this system because they can’t afford health insurance. Those who are insured know that they are only one layoff away from losing it, or that rising premiums could price them out of coverage.
This bill is not perfect, but is it a good bill. The three committees worked hard to address the concerns of the people of my district, and over the past few days we have addressed my own concerns: regional disparities in Medicare reimbursement that have penalized Minnesota health care providers; ensuring that taxpayer dollars are not used to fund abortion services.
Last summer I met the Skare family of Cloquet, Minnesota. Whose son was born with a congenital liver disease that required him to have a liver transplant as a small child. Today, the family of this 20-year-old is buried under mountains of medical bills, despite the fact that they have insurance. They have to constantly fight insurance providers to make them live up to their commitments.
This bill will ensure that families like the Skares will not be held hostage to insurance companies. And it will protect all Americans from being denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions.
Today, we are keeping faith with the American people, ensuring that quality, affordable health care is available to everyone.
A Life A Public Option Could Have Saved
Description:
Video by Matt Johnson
Press release from Take Action Minnesota:
St. Paul, MN - A day before the U.S. House is expected to take up an historic debate of health care reform legislation, Minnesotans financially and emotionally devastated by lack of access to affordable health care held a press conference at the Capitol to share their stories of why a public health insurance option is urgently needed. Their message? We’re counting on Minnesota’s eight U.S. Representatives to pass H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, including a public option, when it reaches the floor for a vote later this week. A vote is expected as soon as Saturday.
The press conference announced the release of twenty-four personal stories of Minnesotans for whom a public option would make all the difference. The twenty-four stories, from around the state, are being emailed one per hour, for twenty-four hours, to all eight of Minnesota’s U.S. House members and their staffs (starting at 6am this morning, and continuing until 5am tomorrow morning). The stories put a face on the health care crisis in Minnesota and have helped to personalize the urgency for Congress to provide a bold federal solution.
Dan McGrath, Executive Director of TakeAction Minnesota, one of the organizational members of the HCAN coalition, opened the press conference by sharing his own story of being diagnosed with Type I diabetes as an adult, only a few months after his employer began offering insurance. McGrath said that while his story ended well, far too many end in tragedy and could be avoided if Americans were given the choice of a public option alongside private insurance plans.
One such story is that of Nora Longley, who died in May 2009 of adrenal cancer. Her uncle, Bob Parker, spoke passionately that Longley might have lived if she had been able to access health care and gain treatment earlier than she did. “Had a public health insurance option been available to Nora early on, when she was struggling to afford coverage and was found ineligible for MinnesotaCare, her cancer would have been more treatable. For our family, a public option may have allowed Nora the chance to live.”
McGrath said that the stories being sent to Minnesota’s congressional delegation today bring an emotional reality to the debate going on in Washington. “These are real lives that have been wrecked by our current health care system. Opponents of reform don’t want to hear these stories. But the majority of Americans, in poll after poll, say they would benefit from the choice of a public health insurance option. And the Minnesotans telling their stories today are depending on Congress to pass a public option. It’s do or die time.”
To access the twenty-four stories as they are released one per hour throughout the day, please visit www.TakeActionMinnesota.org.
House Speaker: Pawlenty Amendment More Politics Than Policy
Description:
Speaker of the House, Margaret Anderson Kelliher spoke with The UpTake's Mike McIntee about Govenor Pawlenty's proposed amendment to the Minnesota constitution that would limit spending in any biennium to the amount of revenue that came in the previous two years.
Speaker of the House, Margaret Anderson Kelliher:
I think it's a very curious timed announcement. I know the Governor is traveling this weekend down to, I believe, Iowa and I think it's another case where the Governor is putting politics ahead of the good policies that Minnesotans need. You know the strange thing about the Governor's proposal is exactly what Senator Pogemiller said, we're not clear that the Governor has ever proposed this himself in the budgets that he's put forward to the legislature. He's always overspent what is going to come in the door, even in the projections that we have.
And think the other thing is that folks would probably be interested in knowing is that when Michelle Bachmann was a state senator she had a proposal like this. I think it wasn't modeled after the colorado law like this or the Colorado constitutional amendment like this. And she wouldn't even come to the Senate tax committee to present the bill. So, I think it's kind of interesting that the Governor is now jumping on this bandwagon.
What folks should understand is that this is even more restrictive than any of the other constitutional amendments around the country that have been proposed like this because this binds you to the revenues in the previous two years. So it's almost like saying that even if the economy is improving, we would have to ignore the improvement in our economy and increased revenues. We couldn't put those to schools or health care or anywhere else. We'd have to live under the old scenario. I just think it makes no sense at all. I don't know if it evens things out at all as the Governor says.
Mike McIntee:
The Governor was trying to make it sound today like well, if we had a "windfall" as he put it, more dollars coming in the door, well, heck we'd be able to decide to spend them. Is that going to be the case by your reading of this constitutional amendment?
MAK:
Oh, I don't think so. According to the Minnesota Budget Project, which has taken a quick look at this, their analysis of this is that even if that money is coming in the biennium, the biennium we're budgeting for, we have to live by the previous biennium. So here's the example that Minnesotans should understand. So if the revenue collected by the state in the 2010 and 11 biennium, because we budget on two year cycles, is about $31 Billion, $34 Billion. And if say the revenue in this next, it drops by three or four billion, you have to ignore that three or four billion. You cannot put that into your schools and you actually add to the deficit situation going forward. I just think it doesn't make sense. I don't think it's well thought out.
And I also believe that Minnesotans recently, last year, just a year ago yesterday, actually decided to make investments in things they value through the legacy amendment. So this is sort of flying counter-productive to where Minnesotans are at in terms of the sorts of things that they value in their state.
MM:
What struck me about the Governor's announcement, that it might be just political as opposed to actually trying to solve a problem, is one of the reporters asked him 'Well Governor, how does this effect the shifts that have been made.' And the Governor said 'I'll have to get back to you on that.' But that's one of his favorite tools. Why wouldn't he have an answer to a very basic question like that?
MAK:
I think that gets to ... I believe this is more about politics than good policy for Minnesotans. And its more about political ambition for the Governor than actually doing the right thing by the school kids of our state. And so you look at that and it's pretty clear that the Governor, one of the Governor's favorite tools of shifting actually would violate this very constitutional amendment.
MM:
Well, let's talk a moment about school kids, because there's nothing in this amendment that says schools. How do we get from what he has in this amendment to schools?
MAK:
Well, because we're talking about the amount of revenues collected and the ability for legislators and a Governor to make decisions, priority decisions about where the money goes. I'll give you examples of what has happened in Colorado under the similar type of constitutional amendment. In Colorado, the spending on their K-12 schools has gone from 35th to 49th in the nation. That's a pretty big drop since 1992. The average per pupil spending fell by $400 because this thing handcuffs you in a way that you cannot make those choices and in fact what happens is that certain areas of the budget. Say corrections, and this has happened in Colorado where if you have courts that are sentencing criminals, there is more precedent for them to be sentencing the criminals, than school kids to get what they need in classroom because it is such a constrain to budget.
MM:
The other thing that strikes me political about this is the Governor had an opportunity to sit down and discuss ideas with you and other Minnesota leaders at the Leadership summit, and he said "no no no, we don't discuss those things now." Yet suddenly it's time to discuss these things and we're not in session. I don't get the equivocation here. Have you been able to figure this out?
MAK:
Well, two things about that Mike that I think are interesting. This idea never came up. And remember we were in a multi-partisan group, both independence party members , republicans and democrats with the former Governors , Speakers and Majority Leaders and Finance Commissioners of the state in early September and not a person raised this idea of a constitutional amendment as the answer to our budgeting woes in this state. They all raised the question of using good judgment and balanced position in Minnesota for a brighter future. The other thing of course is we had breakfast with the Governor just two week ago. And this was again never, never brought up or discussed.
MM:
Let's for the moment say there is no politics involved . And I know that's a fairy tail, but let's just for the moment say that. Senator Tom Bakk in the tax committee said "hey Governor, come on down. We're willing to talk about this. I hope you show up like Michele Bachmann didn't, and we can discuss what this really is. Are you willing to give this a hearing in the legislative session?
MAK:
I think that it's probably one of those things that depending on who is carrying the bill, it looks like Representative Paul Kohls might carry the bill, and where the bill would start. Certainly the chair of the committee where it begins might decide to give a hearing if it is in chair Lenczewski committee she may say let's talk about these issues. I think one of the big issues that chair Lenczewski and others might ask the Governor or the representative of the Governor is how does this at all get away from the pattern of this Governor has been, which is to push the tax burden onto the property tax payer. And that has been also another favorite tool of the Governor of the state of Minnesota, Governor Pawlenty, and that is the massive rise in the amount of property taxes that people are paying across the state. And I think it's pretty clear that this would do nothing to relieve people of the property tax burden and I'm sure that Representative Lenczewski, Chair Lenczewski would love to ask the Governor that question.
MM:
Bottom line. Do you think this bill has a chance of getting through the legislature which the DFL has control of in the House and the Senate?
MAK:
Always difficult to predict something, but I would say this is not one that is going to find a lot of favor right now in the Minnesota House. And I think actually opposition could even be bipartisan. In the past when we've seen ideas like this, very few Republicans even vote these types of ideas. But we certainly are willing to entertain the idea. This is once again the other interesting fact about this is the Governor doesn't need to sign or veto a constitutional amendment. It has to go through the legislative process. And then if the legislature passes it, it goes right out to the ballot. So that is another feature of constitutional amendments that I find interesting.
MM:
And 17 of those last 18 constitutional amendments have passed. So the legislature is a very important gate on this.
Media Rights Groups Call for Probe Into Shooting of VOA Reporter in Puntland
Somali Prime Minister: Food Summit Highlights Millennium Goal Lag
Ineptitude is Costing Somalia
Omar Jamal at the UN: A Slap in the Face or Pure Naiveté?
DeMuth Charged with "Animal Enterprise Terrorism," But Could Possibly Be Released Next Week
Thursday morning, Minneapolis grand jury resister Scott DeMuth was charged with conspiracy to commit animal enterprise terrorism in Davenport, Iowa federal court. He is currently being held in the disciplinary block at the Muscatine County Jail after he was found to be in civil contempt of court for refusing to cooperate with the grand jury that convened in Davenport on Tuesday. Because the civil contempt charge was later dropped, on Friday he attended a hearing to decide on his possible release on unsecured bond; a final decision has not yet been made by the court.
Late Friday, Iowa corporate media reported that DeMuth also pleaded not guilty at the hearing. The article also reported that Assistant U.S. Attorney Cliff Cronk cited items seized from DeMuth during a raid before the 2008 Republican National Convention.Since the passage of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA, an expansion on a previous act) in 2006, the law has only been used twice before yesterday: once in California and once in Utah. The act criminalizes and brands as "terrorism" actions which injure no one - such as like leafletting and sidewalk chalking - and are routinely undertaken by non-radical activists and ordinary citizens. The only criteria is whether the act "damag[es] or interfer[es] with the operations of an animal enterprise," such as by affecting profits. In the California case, one of the alleged crimes, reads the indictment there, was "us[ing] the Internet to find information on bio-medical researchers at the University of California."
Davenport Grand Jury support site | AbolishTheAETA.org | Listen to EWOK! on KFAI's Catalyst: Politics and Culture | Previously @ TCIMC: Feldman and DeMuth Jailed for Contempt | New Support Info | Press Release from EWOK!, Statements from Carrie and Scott | Video: Feldman on Grand Juries & Luce Guillen-Givens on the Green Scare
Catholics, evangelicals pledge to ignore LGBT and abortion rights laws
Religious right leaders announced Friday that they won’t abide by laws that support gay marriage or abortion. One hundred and twenty-five members of the religious right and leaders from the Catholic church signed the Manhattan Declaration. Only one signer was from Minnesota: Archbishop John Nienstedt (pictured) of the Catholic Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis.
The Manhattan Declaration is the religious right’s line in the sand: They’re vowing to ignore any laws that contradict their worldview. The document reads:
Therefore, let it be known that we will not comply with any edict that compels us or the institutions we lead to participate in or facilitate abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide, euthanasia, or any other act that violates the principle of the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every member of the human family.
Further, let it be known that we will not bend to any rule forcing us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality, marriage, and the family.
Further, let it be known that we will not be intimidated into silence or acquiescence or the violation of our consciences by any power on earth, be it cultural or political, regardless of the consequences to ourselves.
The Human Rights Campaign immediately lashed out at the signers of the Manhattan Declaration, pointing out that LGBT-rights groups have gone to great pains to make laws that protect both LGBT people and people of faith.
“This declaration simply perpetuates the fallacy that equality and religious liberty are incompatible and that every step toward fairness for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community is another burden on religious people. In reality, non-discrimination laws are working all over this country, where religious freedom is existing side-by-side with equal opportunity,” Harry Knox, director of the Human Rights Campaign’s Religion and Faith Program, said in a statement. “Advocates of LGBT equality have taken great pains in their legislative efforts to ensure that the rights of religious organizations and people under the First Amendment are protected. It is deeply cynical for the authors of this document to paint themselves as victims because they cannot have a free hand to discriminate, including with taxpayer dollars.”
