Liberal in the Land of Conservative

Dr. Maureen Reed, candidate for both the DFL and Independence Party endorsements for Congress in the 6th District, will not say whether she will abide by the endorsement process, says that on abortion it would be inaccurate to characterize her as either pro-life or pro-choice, and is unwilling to express a preference among the various ways to get to universal health care.

Reed says Clark's electoral success is limited to one of the most liberal pockets of the district. Clark won her St. Cloud Senate seat in a 2005 special election. She won re-election in 2006, and is currently the assistant Senate majority leader.

I’ll clear up Tarryl’s supposed indecision surrounding the public option. I attended a health care forum that Tarryl called at St. Cloud’s Whitney Senior Center. Tarryl’s special guest that night was Sen. John Marty, the most outspoken and consistent advocate for single-payer health care.

From the outset of the event, the focus of the conversation was almost exclusively about Canadacare and single-payer health care.

From the outset of the event, the focus of the conversation was almost exclusively about Canadacare and single-payer health care. Loretta Linus spoke enthusiastically, though a bit combatively, about CanadaCare:

“The doctors are wonderful. You get good care. And it just makes me mad when they talk about how they have to come over here to get good care & that’s not true. Now they say that Canadians have to come over here for good treatment. Well don’t you believe it. Don’t you believe it one bit. That government is so good to all its people. I don’t care if you’re rich or poor. They take care of you. And so many of the people come & they talk crap about how awful their system is. Well, don’t you believe it. Single payer is wonderful if it’s run right.”

She wasn’t the only single-payer advocate to speak that night.

Send them a message they simply cannot ignore. Make a contribution today to the woman that drives the Left CRAZY. Please give what you can to show Washington that Michele Bachmann stands for the Constitution and she stands for the People! Help her stand strong against the Left’s march toward socialism!

Tonight, Tax and Spend Liberal Senator Tarryl Clark is holding a fundraiser outside of the 6th District. The fundraiser will be at Sweeney’s Bar which sits squarely in the 4th District.

Saying that Republicans haven’t proposed health care solutions is either ignorance-driven or it’s plain dishonest. I’ve written more than a few times about Steve Gottwalt’s Healthy Minnesota Plan legislation.

The assumption that this bill is cost-neutral on an accrual (service year) basis is a default position which we take because this proposal constitutes a completely new method of purchasing, for which DHS has no relevant experience. The effects of private market rates, including private market inflation, and of underwriting, and the extent of expected MCHA losses are all areas of great uncertainty. The specification of the benefit set required by the bill is very general, which adds to the uncertainty about the expected fiscal result, because it is not possible to evaluate how attractive the new product may be to potential applicants compared to the existing product. Thus our assumption of cost-neutrality should not be interpreted as the result of analysis, but as a statement of our inability to advise the Legislature whether this bill should be expected to cost money or to save money, or to what extent. A 30% to 40% variance from cost-neutrality -- in either direction -- should be considered entirely possible. It is assumed that the systems work required for this proposal will allow implementation to begin January 1, 2011. [Emphasis Mine]

Ask Democratic officials in the state about Bachmann, and they can barely contain their anger.

"She is a bizarre news story of the month every month," said Brian Melendez, chairman of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party.

"Michele Bachmann is just nuts," said Jeremy Powers, a local DFL chair in Bachmann's district. "She is just an utter embarrassment."

And some Democrats — Powers included — don't hesitate to compare Bachmann with the aforementioned Palin, another conservative lightning rod who speaks with an upper-Midwestern accent, is the mother of a large family, and touts a stridently socially conservative agenda that Democrats regard as outright right wing.

"She is so principally and diametrically opposed to the core principles that we have," Donald McFarland, a Minnesota-based Democratic strategist, said of Bachmann. "She is further to the right than Attila the Hun."

"She's the poster girl for the radical fringe element," added Brian Smoot, who served as political director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee last campaign cycle.

But Democrats say Clark — who still faces a primary challenger in Maureen Reed, a physician who ran for lieutenant governor in 2006 on the Independence Party ticket — presents the party with its best shot of taking out Bachmann since she first ran for the House in 2006, because she already has proved that she can win in a Republican-leaning St. Cloud Senate district.

"She's proven she can win in areas where Republicans are strong," said McFarland, the Minnesota-based Democratic strategist. "Tarryl Clark is the ticket."

"I've run in an area that people didn't think could be won by a Democrat," Clark told POLITICO this week.

“I am terminating my campaign for Congress,” he said in a statement. “This is obviously not an easy decision for me, but I have come to the conclusion that it’s the right one.”

“First and foremost, I want to thank El Tinklenberg for his dedication to public service. He has worked hard on behalf of the citizens of the sixth district and this state as Mayor of Blaine, State Transportation Commissioner and as a Congressional Candidate. El is a tremendous public servant. I wish him the best in his future endeavors.”

"From day one, El and I have shared the common goal of changing the 6th District's representation in Congress. El knows first-hand from his work just how much is at stake for the working families and small businesses across Minnesota. I thank El for his dedication and public service, and know he will continue to be a leader in our community."

1. With Maureen Reed, every indication I am hearing is that apart from her large fund raising numbers she is dead in the water. Don't get me wrong, I like Dr. Reed and would have no trouble supporting her but for one reason or another the people I have contacts with have already counted her out of the endorsement. Does this mean that Reed is really gunning for the IP candidacy? Will she abide by the DFL endorsement? If she were to lose that endorsement, then will she run as an IP candidate or put her name on the DFL primary ballot?

2. Elwyn Tinklenberg appears to have two hurdles to overcome: First, to convince people throughout the district who recall that big blue paw print on his '08 campaign site touting the endorsement by the Blue Dog Coalition that he is NO LONGER a Blue Dog Democrat. Second, much like Reed, there are increasingly loud questions about why he has chosen to ignore the DFL endorsement and take this race to a primary. All of my sources who might have supported him before are abandoning ship because of this decision. Why would Mr. Tinklenberg tell the entire DFL establishment in the district that he will ignore their decision? Could I support Tinklenberg? Sure, but right now his answers to these questions concern me.

3. Tarryl Clark, from EVERYTHING I am hearing, is the early leader in the initial endorsement process. Her one disadvantage might be her initial fund raising which will have to catch up with her competitors. As she has not been very public yet I do not know what her stance is on honoring the endorsement process but given the questions surrounding Reed and Tinklenberg it would interesting to hear what she intends.

UPDATE: h/t to Blue Man on this one...

The Clark website is up with a youtube video message:



Clark makes it clear in the video that she WILL abide by the DFL endorsement which could be an indication that she has called around the district and all but locked up the delegates she needs to win.

It’s patently false to say that Gov. Pawlenty’s statement was the end of negotiating because negotiations took place throughout the weekend. Just because Tarryl didn’t like what she heard during those negotiations doesn’t mean that the negotiations didn’t happen. Rejecting his counter proposals isn’t proof that negotiations ended during Gov. Pawlenty’s press conference.

It’s obvious that the DFL leadership didn’t expect Gov. Pawlenty to be the adult who would do what Minnesota’s Constitution mandates. The DFL leadership didn’t expect Gov. Pawlenty to tell them that he was tired of the stunts that they were playing.

Tarryl says that unallotment “is meant to be a scalpel” that shouldn’t be used except in the final year of the biennium. The statute doesn’t have language in it that would indicate that. Quite the contrary:

Subd. 4.Reduction.(a) If the commissioner determines that probable receipts for the general fund will be less than anticipated, and that the amount available for the remainder of the biennium will be less than needed, the commissioner shall, with the approval of the governor, and after consulting the Legislative Advisory Commission, reduce the amount in the budget reserve account as needed to balance expenditures with revenue.

I’m pretty certain that there isn’t anything in the unallotment provision that says it’s only supposed to be used at the end of the biennium. I’m pretty certain that the part that says it can be used if “the commissioner determines that probable receipts for the general fund will be less than anticipated.” It further states that the commmissioner can’t use this authority unless he’s received the governor’s approval or until he’s consulted with the Legislative Advisory Commission.

Here’s another bit of Tarryl’s spin that needs debunking:

And make no mistake the Governor’s cuts will cost us jobs across the state, jobs in hospitals, nursing homes, schools, and colleges. Police and fire will be reduced and libraries and parks will not be spared. And in the end the cuts alone won’t be enough. This year for the first time Minnesotans will pay more in property taxes than income taxes. That is a direct result of this Governor’s policies and the Governor’s unilateral cuts will only make it worse.

Any city council or mayor that cuts public safety first shouldn’t hold their jobs beyond the next election. In fact, council members or mayors that start by cutting public safety budgets should be forced to resign ASAP because they’ve proven that they can’t make thoughtful decisions.

Instead of laying people off, perhaps these employees would be willing to accept a plan where they’re furloughed for a short period of time like 1 or 2 weeks. There are probably other ways of keeping these people employed. It’s time that the DFL thinks that a cut of any sort automatically leads to their preconceived notions.

3. Under Speaker Margaret Kelliher’s leadership, the House collected $181,120 in out-of-session, tax-free per diem. Under DFL Leader Larry Pogemiller’s leadership, senators collected $143,500 in out-of-session, tax-free per diem.

1. While it’s technically true that the DFL-dominated Legislature sent Gov. Tim Pawlenty a balanced budget, it’s only because the DFL reconvened the conference committee on taxes at 10:30 on the last night. During that meeting, the DFL did a total rewrite, which was debated less than 15 minutes in the House and Senate combined.

No reform, misplaced priorities and tax increases. Even now, there is time to work out other solutions, and Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s invitation to the Democrats is open, as it was from the start of the session.

If the Democrats could interrupt their Tour of Blame long enough to really work with the governor, we might all appreciate the results. If they cannot or will not, rest assured, Pawlenty will balance the budget without more state spending and tax increases.

In the budget-setting toolbox, unallotment is the sledgehammer. It just pounds dents in one part of the state’s budget. It does not give a governor the ability to enact policy or to make changes that might result in increased quality, efficiency or service to taxpayers. Using unallotment as a main budget setting tool is a bad idea, and little more than bad results can be expected.

The state’s budget desperately needs an overhaul, but the mechanic who took over the job is flailing a hammer. That will not bode well for Minnesota’s taxpayers.

The Senate believes its proportionate and balanced solution is the fairest and most equitable approach. It also positions the state for quicker recovery and stronger growth once the financial storm is weathered. The Senate also takes a fiscally responsible approach. Using a combination of cuts, federal recovery funds and new revenues it brings the state budget into balance for not only the next two years, but also the two years beyond that. This is something our Governor does not plan to do. Instead he pushes much of our present problems into the next two years. Seemingly he is hoping, and that’s all it is, is a hope, that things will get much better, much sooner than most economists believe. If his hope is misplaced Minnesota will be in even worse financial straits.

The Senate plan calls for a 7% proportional cut for each of the budget areas. However, those reductions will be softened by using federal recovery funds in several key areas, including education, health care and the courts. Recently the Senate passed its Early Education through 12th grade finance bill. Federal funds will reduce the cuts in this area to about 3%. Higher education funding cuts will be reduced to about 2%. The bill even provides a slight increase in early childhood education funding. Many studies have indicated early childhood education provides the best return on investment for taxpayer dollars.

While the Senate proposes reduced funding to schools, cities and counties, it also cuts some of the strings that usually come attached to that funding. The idea is to enhance local control and allow local authorities more discretion in how they spend the money. The belief is that less red tape will keep more teachers in the classroom and more police on the street.

We hope this proposal to establish a unified county in Central Minnesota will start the renewed discussion. The discussion should raise a wide variety of thoughts and ideas.

As a start, we offer three questions to be answered by all of us.

1. Will a unified county in Central Minnesota be more efficient and effective for most households?

2. Will a unified county improve our business climate and help create jobs if employers only have to meet one system of standards, procedures, and regulations rather than three?

3. Will a unified county provide more accessible and consistent services for veterans, seniors, and families?

Both legislators talked about Tarryl Clark's taking $30,000+ in per diem in the context of the legislature needing to show leadership in cutting costs with the oversized deficit.