Wednesday, December 21, 2011

House Republicans draw ire from own party, WSJ editorial page

When the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page excoriates House Republicans, you know it's serious.

That's just what happened recently when House Republicans rejected a heavily bipartisan bill to extend payroll tax cuts to $160 million Americans. The Senate voted 89-10 to pass the two-month extension (all but seven Republicans voted in favor), with the idea being to negotiate another one after the holidays.

Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell negotiated that deal with Senate Democrats, who with Obama, agreed to a number of Republican ideas. Everyone seemed to think McConnell had worked with his friend Speaker John Boehner fashioning a Senate bill that would pass the House.

No so. And no one seems to know how the confusion or debacle occurred. My inside Washington sources tell me even if the Senate agreed to a conference committee now, procedural rules call for a minimum 90 hours of debate, something that would be tough to do before Jan. 1.

Those same sources also point to Tea Party Republicans again defying the leadership with Boehner's speakership on the line.

CBS News headlined the story: "House GOP takes a political beating in payroll tax fight."

Here's the story that quotes The Wall Street Journal editorial page, numerous other Republican Senators who I have never seen be this critical of their own party.

CBS story

Some samples from the Journal editorial.

"Given how [Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell] and House Speaker John Boehner have handled the payroll tax debate, we wonder if they might end up re-electing the president before the 2012 campaign even begins in earnest."


"The GOP leaders have somehow managed the remarkable feat of being blamed for opposing a one-year extension of a tax holiday that they are surely going to pass. This is no easy double play."

And here are quotes from the CBS story from Republicans about their own House leadership.

Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., said "now is not the time for drawing lines in the sand," while Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the ongoing fight is "harming the Republican party" and "harming the view, if it's possible anymore, of the American people about Congress."

Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., said there was "no reason" for House Republicans to keep up their fight, adding that "what is playing out in Washington, D.C. this week is about political leverage, not about what's good for the American people."

I'm not sure you can be more damning than that of part of your own party.


More from the Journal editorial: (full editorial)

"But now Republicans are drowning out that victory in the sounds of their circular firing squad. Already four GOP Senators have rejected the House position, and the political rout will only get worse"

"The GOP leaders have somehow managed the remarkable feat of being blamed for opposing a one-year extension of a tax holiday that they are surely going to pass. This is no easy double play."

Journal's advice: (which I agree with)

"At this stage, Republicans would do best to cut their losses and find a way to extend the payroll holiday quickly. Then go home and return in January with a united House-Senate strategy that forces Democrats to make specific policy choices that highlight the differences between the parties on spending, taxes and regulation."


Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Put out your flag: It's Bill of Rights day

I'm putting up my flag Thursday, Dec. 15. It's the 220th anniversary of the ratification of the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment.

If we celebrate the 4th of July, we should definitely celebrate the Bill of Rights. The Founding Fathers could've been drunk when they wrote the Declaration of Independence. It's clear, they had to be sober when writing the Bill of Rights.

This country would look a lot different if the 70 or so people who met in Philly in 1791 hadn't decided the English common law our Constitution was modeled after needed some basic guarantees for average folks.

Alas, the First Amendment allows me to raise more hell at my newspaper editor job than is probably socially acceptable most places.

Today, I encourage you to make your kids learn the five freedoms of the First Amendment. Of religion, of the press, of speech, of assembly and the right to petition your government.

Pay attention Occupy Wall Streeters and Tea Partiers.

Yes, people with money and big media may have "more free speech" than most of us, but we still all have two choices: Speak or be silent. Silence is worse.

So raise your glasses, raise your flags. Be impertinent, outspoken and a pain to your government, corporations, politicians or whoever you want.

There's no penalty.

Sunday, December 11, 2011

Tips on doing the Holidazzle Parade in Minneapolis

I realized my youngest daughter had never really seen the Holidazzle Parade in Minneapolis, so seeing a note that light rail rides would be free, I decided she needed to experience of one of the perennial Minnesota holiday traditions.

I think the last time our family checked it out was like 13 years ago, when our kids were like 7 and 5. The youngest one, now, 13 had never seen it.

The best part about it: it's not long, 30 minutes tops. Drawback, if you don't get spots early in the skyways, you have to squeeze in or stand in the cold if it's a cold night.

It's probably better viewed from the street but there are about four skyways you can view it from and there's a long verticle skyway that goes along the street at the downtown Target store.

But people get spots at skyways, and they rope them off so people can still move through them 1 to 2 hours ahead of the 6:30 p.m. start. The parade runs Thursday through Sunday every weekend until Dec. 18, I believe.

So you've really only got one more week to check it out.

The parade is cool. People walking wear suits with Christmas lights all over them. They have four or five big floats, all lit up and of course, a Santa float. (see picture).

With little kids, I'd almost recommend getting a hotel room and hanging out in the Twin Cities for a day or two.

We took the light rail in at 4 p.m. but it wasn't so crowded we couldn't sit down. We park at Ft. Snelling, but a lot of folks park at Mall of America, the first stop on light rail going back into Minneapolis.

We got downtown about 4:35 p.m. Walked about six blocks to The Local, an Irish pub/restaurant with reasonable prices for Minneapolis.

We got seated right away about 5 p.m., though with parties more than 2, I'm guessing there was a bit of a wait. We ordered a "sharing" plate of four pulled pork mini sandwiches with apple cole slaw on them and fries. $12. Beer was $5 a glass. A nice irish ice cream treat was $3.

Because air temp was like 17 degrees, we snuck into the Target skyway watch and squeezed in a spot at 6 p.m.

Place was packed after the parade, but caught light rail and did get a seat again. Back home to Grandma's in Eagan by 8 p.m.

A fun experience. My daughter enjoyed it immensely. I didn't mind it myself.  A nice Minnesota holiday tradition.

She also enjoyed the big city seeing huge tree at IDS center and guys with spiked hair, or yeah, and the Tibetan protestors were walking along Nicollet Mall about an hour before the parade.

Thursday, December 8, 2011

I'm shocked, shocked; Congress in Casablanca

Many a member of Congress seem to be enthusiastically supporting an insider trading law of their very own that a few years ago was as popular as a lobbyist without a lunch ticket.

Amazing what an story on CBS "60 Minutes" can do to enable the righteous.

Congressman Tim Walz, D-1st District finds himself to be a very popular guy after taking over the authorship of the STOCK bill a few years ago from a retiring Rep. Brian Baird of Washington, who had found few if any co-sponsors.

"60 Minutes" aired a piece on the practice of several prominent members of Congress having traded stocks near the time they came into some inside knowledge about how government policies might impact a certain industry. All have denied a connection.

But since the "60 Minutes" piece, Walz has found an amazing 170 co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle.

The law, which stands for Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge, would essentially make it illegal for members of Congress to buy and sell stocks on knowledge they gained from being in a position of power in Congress.

The outpouring of support from all flavor of Congressman or woman stems from a desire, I suspect, for Congress to look above board in all its dealings at a time when it has some of the lowest approval ratings ever.

The whole bandwagon jumping scenario reminds me of a scene in the movie Casablanca when the prefect of police Monsieur Renault comes into Humphrey Bogart's saloon after he is ordered to find a reason to shut it down.

When Rick (Bogart) asks why the saloon must be shut down, the preferct says "I'm shocked, shocked to find gambling occurring in this saloon." And that's just before they hand him his winnings.

Members of Congress also seem a bit "shocked" that the insider trading law had not been in place before.

Monday, December 5, 2011

Vikings stadium, property taxes and other cosmic connections

Biggest impediment to getting a new Vikings stadium approved any time soon: The Vikings 2-9 record.

People can accept losing teams though, and especially in Minnesota Nice country. The Wilf's shouldn't take Minnesota Nice for granted.

The 2-9 record isn't totally unacceptable to Minnesotans, and we're kind of like Packer fans in that respect: Keep believing in something even when the facts suggest your faith would be better appreciated at the first Lutheran church.

No, we'll accept a 2-9 record if the team looks competitive. And for the most part, the Vikings have been competitive in almost every game. They just can't be consistently competitive for the regulation amount of minutes in a game.

Embarrassing games like the second Green Bay game, though, better be gone for the season. We just don't have that much patience. At some point, we don't like stuff rubbed in our noses, even though we are humble Minnesotans.

Property taxes and the Vikings

One of the suggestions by the Vikings in recent full page ads in state newspapers was the idea very similar to what many of us know as "Tax Increment Financing." It's a tactic that has been used for every kind of small business in Minnesota and it's been used on projects from small town grocery stores to suburban strip malls.

The Vikings essentially proposed a kind of tax increment financing for the Vikings stadium: TIF as we call it, holds that revenues generated by a project be used to pay off that government's subsidy for that project.

So the Vikings proposed the public part of the stadium be paid off with revenues from player income taxes, stadium sales taxes and memorabilia taxes among other things.

The theory here is that because you wouldn't have those revenues if or (But For) there were no Vikings, it's legit to use them for a project, essentially creating a wash, or if you believe certain people, a "long-term" gain with short-term financing that doesn't really cost the general fund anything.

It's as good an argument as one might make to outstate Minnesota, where I surmise a good portion of the opposition to a Vikings stadium lies.

But I must say, of all the TIF projects I've heard proposed to small town councils in outstate Minnesota, that is one of the most creative, and possibly most saleable, ideas out there.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Revenue future: Minnesota's dilemma

A two hour meeting with Mankato businesspeople and Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue Myron Franz revealed some surprises.

Business people were willing to "give up" some exemptions like sales tax rebate on capital equipment, willing to have legal services taxed, willing to give up somebody else's property tax break, in exchange for reforming tax code, mostly away from the property tax.

Franz told the group that Gov. Mark Dayton was "committed" to Minnesota tax reform but wants to gather information from public meetings around the state, from Republicans and Democrats, and then make a proposal for reform in 2013.

He said Dayton was a "taskmaster" who works very hard and doesn't want his advisors to sugarcoat anything.

Franz produced the prop of a three legged stool with each leg representing property tax, income tax and sales taxes. The percentage that state gets from each was proporotional to the length of each leg of the stool. A few years ago, the stool was pretty even and it stood up.

Now, with property tax making up almost 40 percent of all government revenue, the stool fell over. Interesting visual.

Most of the feedback on what needs to be fixed centered around the property tax. One business owner said three of her properties had increases of 20 percent. A manufacturing plant faced an increase of 7 percent.

Another business owner said their taxes were up 43 percent.

The commissioner and his staff will be traveling to dozens of cities throughout Minnesota in the next year where they will meet with businesspeople and host evening Town Hall meetings for the public.

In a conversation with members of The Free Press editorial board after the meeting, Franz said the Legislature gives the revenue commissioner a number to increase collections by and it goes into the state budget forecast.

That number is $83 million for this biennium. So Frans has to hire staff and figure out where to find $83 million and Legislators even push for more. But it will be a number he has to answer to.

The meeting was organized by Greater Mankato Growth.

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Bank bailout done in secrecy: an outrageous story

There's a great story on Bloomberg financial news online that details the bank bailouts of 2008, the need to keep it secret from taxpayers footing the bill, and the sort of arrogance that must have come with people making these decisions.

Here's the story.

In my mind, the big bank bailout is ranking right up there with the biggest scams of all time.

It is most troubling because it tears down the notion that we all live in an America where hard work is rewarded and we all take the same personal and financial risks when we screw up in business or the workplace.

Not so with some of these big banks, and I mean big banks. We should not confuse these folks with your average small-town banker or even bigger regional banks.

These were the biggest of  the bigs and the Bloomberg story shows they had not only influence, but more or less protection from the mean results of capitalism gone bad, something all the rest of us and our families must face without the government protecting us.

Then, they not only didn't pay the price for their mistakes, they were rewarded with low interest taxpayer loans where they turned around and made $13 billion.

 At one point, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke is saying that he didn't want to release the names of the banks getting taxpayer money because of the "stigma" it would create.

That explanation is not going to fly with folks who face the "stigma" of unemployment and home foreclosures.

The Bloomberg story is what good journalism is all about. It takes on powerful interests, (Bloomberg sued the fed and the big banks for two years and finally won its Freedom of Information case), and exposes their evil to the governed.

You will not get this kind of journalism from a blogger or a political organization posing as a news organization.

Ohio Congressman Sherrod Brown called the story one that would unite the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street.

I couldn't agree more.

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

The federal deficit: remembering how we got here

 A story on NPR this morning reminded listeners about important and surprising facts we may have forgotten about how we got the current federal deficit, and how we got into this mess.

A few of the surprises: It wasn't just Democrats against the proposed Bush tax cuts in personal income and especially capital gains. Norm Orenstein, of the conservative American Enterprise Institutes, reminds people he and others said at the time that the cuts in capital gains taxes were going to be a huge drain on federal revenues.

This was in and around 2000-2002. Says Orenstein: "Guess what, it was a huge drain on federal revenues."

In 2000, we had a $200 billion federal surplus. Now, it's in the area of $1.5 trillion., a seven-fold increase.

But we continued to cut taxes, and it is important to remember that the Bush tax cuts that were recently extended, had to be put through with the same, some say shady, parliamentary procedure they used to get the health care reform through Congress - the fuzzy "reconciliation" process.

Another surprise: the report reminded people that Allen Greenspan was saying paying down all our debt would have negative economic implications, would hurt growth.

But doing a little research shows that seven House Democrats and 2 Senate Democrats voted for the Bush tax cuts in 2003. One Republican in the House and one in the Senate voted no.

This will be instructive when the votes comes at the end of 2012 whether or not to extend the cuts. As someone who is schooled in economics, it seems to me there hasbeen enough time to examine whether these tax cuts "worked" in other words, did they create jobs. I would say no. Did they help keep the jobs that were already there? Possibly.

The tax cuts did put more money in the pockets of Americans instead of paying taxes. That's a given, but there was apparently so much "capacity" in the currently existing economy, no new jobs were needed to satisfy the increased consumer spending.

That's not surprising given a job market where one person is now doing the work that used to be done by two or three people.

Monday, November 21, 2011

Property tax confusion part 2

By now a lot of folks have received their property tax statements and are  probably most surprised by the lower value of their property and the higher taxes.

We heard of one case where a farmer said their taxes went up 100 percent.

The values are confusing because they compare last year's "market" value, a close proximity to the real value of your property and this year's tax value, which is not really a "market" value.

There's a sliding scale by which the new property tax law put into place by state lawmakers reduces your property value, but for tax purposes only.

For a home value of $76,000, the new law reduces the value of the property for tax purposes by about $30,000. For a $150,000 home, the new law reduces the value of the property for tax purposes by about $24,000.

Again, the value shows up as a value for tax purposes, but it's not very clear to most folks. So a lot of folks are looking at a value and seeing their home or business has declined in value.

In many cases, taxes also will go up, even if the local government did not change their rates or levies one bit.

The Legislature did this because they eliminated that tax credit they provided local governments, known as market value tax credit.

But the bottom line is they still cut tax relief. The market value credit was worth about $261 million in tax relief state wide, and they replaced with the exclusion credit, but that had the impact of lowering overall county tax bases.

So if they tax base is lower and the county's levy stays the same, taxes still go up in many, many cases.

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Property tax increases will stun homeowners

In a few days homeowners will get their property tax statements, formerly known as Truth in Taxation statements.

There are likely to be some big surprises.

The state budget deal agreed to last year by the Republican Legislature and Gov. Mark Dayton removed what is called the Market Value Credit.

Basically, it was a formula for reducing the property tax people and business paid. The local governments reduced your tax bill and were reimbursed for that by the state with a payment directly to the local government.


But it was usually only partially funded. So, the governments ended up giving a state mandated property tax break, but were rarely reimbursed for the full amount.

But eliminating the credit helped reduce last year's $1.5 to $2 billion deficit by about $261 million. And that is about how much property taxes will go up in aggregate this year, according to estimates by the Minnesota Inter-County Association.

The Legislature did try to mitigate this hit by providing what's called an "exclusion" to certain property. Basically they changed the state law on how local government's must calculate the value of your property and the tax.

Whereas, for example, a property that used to be valued at $76,000, will be valued at $46,000, thereby reducing the tax owed on that property.

But what people are likely to see on their tax bill is lower home value and higher taxes. The higher taxes come from local government having to set higher levies to make up for the loss of market value money. That will be a real shock.

As I've said before, the property tax is one tax where Minnesota is far below other states, so it's the one tax we could raise and still be "competitive."

But this is not likely to go over well. Tax increases will be 5, 10, 15 percent and most of the small towns and suburban areas will be hit hardest, locales that generally vote Republican.

It's going to be an interesting election.

Monday, November 14, 2011

Everything politics, economy, taxes

Minnesota Republicans have today proposed a property tax relief program costing $80 million for next session.

That's to mitigate what are expected to be some pretty hefty increases in business and residential property taxes coming in notices the next few weeks.

The reduction and removal of the market value homestead credit helped plug a $1 billion plus budget hole last year and was part of the agreement between Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton and the Republicans who controlled the Legislature.

Unlike years past, where property tax increases could be passed off on the local governments as a tangential reaction to the state, this year, the state Legislature actually did increase the rate at which property is taxed. No argument.

So, that message is getting through to lots of taxpayers. I'd be a little worried if I were an outstate Republican in a district that has in the past been represented by the other party.

The announcement of the property tax relief program today tells me two things: one, Republicans really believe they will be blamed for property tax increases this year, and two, they're already hearing about it from constituencies, like business, that know the higher property taxes are coming.

Republicans also will be faced with their own suburban-rural split in support. Typically, small town and outstate Minnesota have supported Republicans, but what some of those outstate legislators are now realizing their suburban brethren and leaders may not be in sync with constituencies of outstate legislators when it comes to property tax and local government aid.

Many can still not live down how they voted against an LGA compromise years ago, that would have been fair to outstate Minnesota. They were convinced by then "suburban brethren" led by a guy named Tim Pawlenty to vote against the compromise plan by Dan Dorman, a Republican from Albert Lea.

Actually, of all the taxes Minnesotans face, we rank lowest in property taxes, something like 37 to 47 if I remember right. So, logically, property taxes are the place where we could raise money and still be "competitive" with other states.

But property taxes and the "most public" of all taxes. Everyone can see what you pay. So they can really be a political hammer when used against those who raise them.

And Republican legislators and Dayton will not be able to escape the blame. Most legislative Democrats, however, can say they voted against the final bill, which is mostly true.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

CNBC Republican debate offered more than CNN

The CNBC Republican Presidential Debate Wednesday night was far superior in my mind to two debates hosted by CNN.

CNBC's Maria Bartiromo and CNBC's Chief Washington Correspondent John Harwood moderated and did a great job. I liked that they stopped candidates who either weren't really answering the question (which happens a lot) or resorted to talking points.

 And they cut candidates short if they were refusing to answer questions, like Newt Gingrich.


You could tell Bartiromo and Harwood were very knowledgeable about the issues.

It was also refreshing when they brought in several other CNBC correspondents to ask a question or two. The financial reporter and the personal finance reporter offered especially unique questions that matter.


They also focused on money issues, which was really a great idea. I think they probably garnered more viewership because Americans are really focused on the economy in this election, not social issues and even not much about foreign affairs.


CNN's two debate, one hosted by Wolf Blitzer and the other by Anderson Cooper were OK, but they did seem to let the candidates get away with not answering questions, and focused more on trying to bait candidates to attack each other.

Both networks hosted the debates with political entities. They CNN debate hosted one with the Tea Party and CNBC hosted this one with the Michigan Republican Party. I still don't care for such partnerships. The hosting also stacks the audience to be partisan, so if people don't make the connection, they assume a general audience is clapping for every talking point or sound bite.

I don't often agree with Michele Bachmann, but she complimented the CNBC hosts afterward saying she thought they did a good job hosting the debate, getting at substantive issues and not "baiting" the candidates to attack each other like the other recent debates.

To that, I agree.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Hallelujah: Congress just got sensible

I've often said the political polarization in our country among leading political figures occurs because our society and media rewards political leaders for rhetoric, not reason, for combativeness not cooperation.

Well there are 100 members of Congress, 40 Republicans and 60 Democrats, who I am going to try to reward for their cooperation and their reason.

These members of the House recently sent a letter to the so called deficit reduction "supercommittee" to simply consider all options, including new revenue, in helping to solve the federal deficit problem.

They also, wisely, recommended the budget committee trim the deficit by $4 trillion over 10  years, far  beyond the mandate they have to trim $1.2 trillion.

Here's the story.
Here's the letter.

Of Minnesota's congressional delegation signing the letter were Tim Walz, D, 1st District, Collin Peterson, D, 7th District,

So thumbs up to them.

Not signing including Republicans Chip Cravaack and Erik Paulsen and Michele Bachmann and Democrats Betty McCollum and Keith Ellison.

And thumbs down to them.

Republicans signatories may have taken the larger risk in signing this letter. They face the wrath of not only the tea party, but of political kingpin Grover Norquist, who got several of them to sign his pledge not to raise taxes.

I admire the courage of Republican Congresswoman Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo who has tea party support and was a signer of the no tax pledge in 2008, but not last year.

She would prefer to solve the deficit she said, without raising taxes, but realizes there is more at stake her than ideology and we do not live in an ideal world.

Her quote from national story: "This is not an ideal world." She said the national debt is a problem created by Republicans and Democrats, and both parties must solve it. She said she is not "an absolute `hell no' person when it comes to considering all options.

 "Grover Norquist is not in my district," she said. "I represent the state of Wyoming and its people."


Norquist seemed for one time in his life to be silenced. He didn't return calls to the Associated Press.

Many others signed the letter, many took political risks in doing so.

Reps. Heath Shuler, D-N.C., and Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, organized the letter.

Said Shuler: "I'll give up my election. I'll give up my seat" in exchange for an agreement to improve the country's fiscal future, he told the Associated Press.

Shuler gets on my A-list for most courageous political statement of the year.

Democrats signing the letter put entitlement reform and cuts on the line.

Democrat Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., "Those of us who are the strongest supporters of entitlement programs have to be at the table to guarantee sustainability," Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., said in an interview. "If we stand on the sidelines, those programs will be in enormous jeopardy."

Finally, some Congressional action we can reward. Others would do well to take their lead seriously.

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

It's "snow decision" in North Mankato

The North Mankato City Council is debating snow plowing policies for this year with the choice between being nice and saving taxpayers money.

Maybe, I'm turning in the abominable snowman here, but I vote for saving taxpayers money.

The choice is between running a traditional snow emergency and ticketing cars that are violating parking rules even though they've been given fair warning and city plow crews going back and back again, waiting for reluctant vehicles and recalcitrant owners to move them.

A lot of other cities have snow emergencies. They can't afford overtime paid snow plow crews going again and again over streets waiting for owners to move their cars. Mankato doesn't do it. North Mankato shouldn't either.

Mankato has done everything possible to notify residents of the danger of being towed. They can sign up for text messages and the like.

There's plenty of opportunities for residents to comply.

North Mankato has been a bit reluctant to give its residents some "tough love" when it comes to snowplowing because so many have complained when it happens.

But many of those same taxpayers are saying North Mankato suffers from excessive municipal spending. They can't have it both ways.

A city can only do so much. Fair warning is fair warning. North Mankato has the right, and indeed the obligation, to save taxpayers money by "getting 'er done."

No whining.

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Independents will clobber tea party and occupy Wall Street

You've heard about the tea party.

Now you're hearing about the occupy Wall Street group.

Both have garnered more publicity than they deserve in my view, but that's what national broadcast media gravitates to: a good visual and people angry at the government. It's an easy, uncomplicated story and it gets ratings.

Ultimately, though, I think the same people who've influenced and in fact turned dozens of elections in the past will do it again in the next two years: the independents.

You won't find them at tea party rallies: (they don't go for the extreme radical stuff) and you won't find them at the occupy Wall Street stuff (they don't do much grass roots stuff, pseudo or not).

Nope. They're just average Americans, well educated, who vote for ideas instead of ideologies. They vote for people instead of political sound bites.

It's a lot like The Free Press editorial board if you ask me, but that's not the point here.

I'm no political consultant, but here's my take on how the next president will win the election. They'll appeal to independents on a number of issues as follows.

Deficit reduction long-term, bolster the economy with smart stimulus short-term. Don't take tax increases off the table, make taxes more fair at the same time. Eliminate corporate welfare to big oil as well as farmers.

Don't try to talk these folks into the idea that tax breaks for the rich will create jobs. They know a lo t of rich people, and they haven't seen them creating many jobs. There is not one iota of evidence that these folks have seen anywhere that will convince them of that fallacy and they are not the kind of people who believe a lie, even if you tell it to them 16 times.

But don't also propose ridiculous spending or regulatory ideas in the middle of one of the most prolonged worst economy in decades. Making unemployed workers a class for discrimination is just not going to fly with these folks.

Restricting Tony the Tiger as a longtime brand on cereal boxes to prevent childhood obesity is also not going to fly. It's way too liberal an idea. Besides, parents should be in charge of childhood obesity.

If anything, we should allow insurance companies to charge health insurance rates based on how many obese children in a family.

Ultimately, the independents are not going to be won over with slogans from left or right. They're smarter than that. They need meat behind the ideas. They need substance.

The party that provides it will come out on top.

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Tax the rich in the context of a Christian message

As the arguments on taxes and spending rage on in Washington D.C., and we launch into a debate about who has enough, who has a little and who should pay their fair share of taxes, the subject took on a new meaning for me at Wednesday night church listening to the pastor's sermon.

I saw it in a different context that might surprise you.

The sermon was as non-political as one can get, and was not terribly out of the ordinary. It was about how God provides a lot of the things we have, whether it be cell phones or the basics like a roof over our head.

The essential message was related via a story to the congregation about how the pastor knew a man who came up to him one day and said "All I have comes from God."

There are, of course, complications to understanding this message. Why do some people live in million dollar homes and some sleep outside every night in a cardboard box?

Rich or poor. It all comes from God. The pastor said he reacted with skepticism to the man. He, and others like him, and all of us in America, feel we work damn hard for our money and all the things we have acquired.

The American ideal and dream, most of us would say, does not come from God, but it comes from the sweat on our brow, the stress on our face.

That of course, in a nutshell, is the argument playing out in Washington these days. Tax the rich, some say, so they pay their fair share. Others say the rich have earned everything they got, and if we tax them, they will no longer create jobs.

I don't have to repeat the narrative which I'm sure readers have heard play out a thousand times on every cable news show possible.

I have just one thought on this: If we all believed "everything we had came from God" would we even be having the who-pays-their-fair-share debate?

The pastor didn't really have an answer for all this, nor did he need to. One can't explain, really, why some have lots and some have none.

Either way, he said, for those of us who've been given lots of things, "it's what we do with it" that matters.

That might be a good place to start the debate in Washington.

Wednesday, September 28, 2011

Did health care reform cause premiums to rise?

The Kaiser Family Foundation reported health care premiums rose 9 percent in 2011, a report that is likely to generate a lot of talk on if the health care reform act of 2009-2010 had anything to do with it.

The short answer is yes, but only 1 to 2 percent of the total premium increase, according to Kaiser. Premiums would have increased 7 percent anyway.

On the other side of the coin, White House analysts say premiums only went up because insurers overestimated the cost of the new health care reform act. (They produce figures to back it up like health care worker wages were lowest increase in years), and they argue, average health care insurer company earnings exceeded estimates by 45 percent.

There's a solid article on this, giving both sides good weight, in The Christian Science Monitor here.

My own take: I tend to agree that if insuror premiums are way higher than they expected, they built in a little too much cost expectation. Seems plausible.

The only two provisions that the report says impacted the premiums were adding college kids at 26 or under to parent's plans and requirements for some preventative care, both of which should actually help lower costs. (Adding kids because most are extremely health and don't use health care though their parents are now paying extra premiums for them)

Preventive care should help stop a sickness from getting serious and costing more.

Carlson on Bachmann, Republican Tea Party

An interesting blog by former Minnesota Gov. Arne Carlson on Michele Bachmann and the Tea Party influence on the Republican Party in Congress.

Carlson contends that only 25 percent of Republicans who control the House are Tea Party members, but they have tremendous undue influence, in his mind, over Republican Speaker John Boehner.

He contends Democrats will have field day with this in the election. I'm not so sure.

I do believe the 2012 election will start very early, and be very deep, and actually will engage people more than ever despite polls that generally show people are very disgusted with Congress.

Will they turn their disgust into action or into despair?

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

MnDot commits to Highway 14 safety

It was good to see that MnDOT Commissioner Tom Sorel was committed to keeping the Highway 14 project west of North Mankato on track for needed safety improvements. (Story)

News that the project bids had come in 30 percent over estimates was troubling given money is tight all over. But Sorel reiterated his commitment to the project while saying MnDOT would be examining the bids and design to either rebid or possibly change the project's design/build nature so it is less costly.

The project is of particular interest to us here at The Free Press. Reporter Mark Fischenich completed an exhaustive three-day series last year on the safety record of the Highway. An in-depth examination of the safety statistics had never been done.

Here's the series

Our report showed, among other things, that stretch of highway had a fatality rate that was 94 percent higher than the state average. The series prompted MnDOT to take a closer look at putting some money into the project.

Before that, it had not been scheduled for work for some 20 years.

We hope the project can get done, and get done at price that seems reasonable. We all know making that Highway a four-lane to New Ulm will make it much safer.

We appreciate MnDOT and Sorel making the commitment to making that road safe.

Monday, September 26, 2011

Clearing up tax rates for rich and poor

Regrettably, a so called "fact check" by the Associated Press muddies the water when it comes to determining who pays the highest tax rates, the rich or not so rich.

The debate was sparked by billionaire Warren Buffet continuing to proclaim he shouldn't pay taxes at a "lower rate" than his secretary or others in his office.

This statement gets summarized a lot in the media to a translation that he shouldn't pay lower taxes than his secretary which is an entirely different thing than a "lower rate" of tax.

What Buffet was really referring to was the capital gains rate that is 15 percent and a typical income tax rate most middle class couples would pay would be about 28 percent.

The AP article gets to that salient point in the 14th paragraph of a 19 paragraph article.

This AP article does a disservice to the whole debate in my opinion because it deals with "average" tax rates, "total" taxes the rich pay (we know they pay more in total taxes, almost all the time and almost always have, so it's kind of irrelevant).

One can make an argument for "average tax rates" because some wealthy folks pay a lot higher rate and others pay nothing. So, I would expect "on average" wealthy folks will pay a higher rate, also including all federal taxes, as the AP analysis does, though it doesn't say if it includes estate taxes.

That wasn't Buffet's point. It was the "rate" at which people are taxed, which, is really the relevant statistic.

So the AP did a fact check,but they left out the relevant facts to be compared. The big question is: Should we tax capital gains at 15 percent and regular income of the same amount at 28 percent? Most wealthy folks have capital gains, most average folks have "regular income" hence the disparity argument.

So, there you have it, a good argument for your next cocktail party.

And at the risk of sounding like a surly editor, don't argue Buffet should just pay taxes voluntarily if he feels this way, or you will get on my list for a free copy of "How to argue effectively."

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Cal Thomas gets a C- for recent column: his job is in jeopardy at Free Press

I agree with conservative columnist Cal Thomas sometimes. I think he sometimes has moments approaching reasonable thought and arguments that hold up the conservative banner well.

Then he lets his political leanings or allegiances or whatever get in the way of a good argument.

Take his Sunday, Sept. 18 column called "Ron Paul was right."

He starts out the column talking about the recent CNN/Tea Party debate (sponsorship between political organizations and news organizations has already been excoriated  by me in a previous column), and how Wolf Blitzer's question on a hypothetical situation of a young person without health care somehow showed the bias or Blitzer and raised important principles of personal responsibility for all of us.

Then he says: "Normally, a hypothetical ques­tion should not be answered," That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard from a journalist. Blitzer's question may have been hypothetical in a literal sense, but the situation Blitzer described, a young person not buying health insurance but then getting treated and having his health care paid for by the rest of us plays out in this country thousands of times every single day.

It's one of the main reasons we have a health care cost and coverage problem.

Thomas gets a C- for lacking the apparent knowledge that this is one of the main problems.

Thomas says it sparked a necessary and controversial answer from Paul, and that's where Thomas veers into the land of odd thoughts.

Here's Blitzer's question:  “A healthy 30-year- old young man has a good job, makes a good liv­ing, but decides, you know what? I’m not going to spend $200 or $300 a month for health insurance because I’m healthy, I don’t need it. But some­thing terrible happens, all of a sudden he needs it. Who’s going to pay if he goes into a coma, for example? Who pays for that?”

 

Here's Thomas responding: The question was designed to appeal to the status quo with the fed­eral government picking up the tab, but Paul cut through the question to give a powerful answer: “...what he should do is whatever he wants to do, and assume responsibility for himself. ... That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to prepare and take care of everybody ...”

Blitzer interrupted: “... are you say­ing society should just let him die?”


More Thomas:
 

Some in the audience shouted “ yes.” They must have come from the previous debate where Gov. Rick Perry’s pride in executing convicted murderers was wildly applauded.

Responded Paul: “... We’ve given
up on this whole concept that we might take care of ourselves and assume responsibility for ourselves.

Paul essentially went on to say in the old days the churches handled people without health insurance. Yeah, tell that to my pastor. Medical bills can be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.




I don't know when the last time Paul was in church or when he last talked to a minister, but the ministers and churches I know would not be shelling out $100,000 to "help out." each of their 20 families that need it.



They'd hold a spaghetti feed


At least Thomas admits a key point here in this whole debate, but he treats it as a minor point.


That is that federal law prohibits any organization from denying someone care at an emergency room because they cannot pay.

Thomas goes on to veer off on another topic about London ministers agreeing to help a jobless family, and if we all did that, our problems would be solved.   


It would be nice, and it happens every day in America, but it will not solve the  health care problem.

Thomas lack of attention to pertinent facts in this debate is hurting the conservative cause.

Since I make the decision to pay for Thomas's column, I'm considering firing him, and maybe picking up a very sharp conservative thinker in David Brooks of the New York Times.This isn't the first Thomas column that really gives a bad name to solid conservative thought.

Readers. What do you think? E-mail me at jspear@mankatofreepress.com
 

Your taxes, political accountability and random stuff

Big buzz today on political/news wires and twitter is just who is responsible, accountable for predicted property tax increases this year in many communities in Minnesota.

I have in the past agreed with ideas Sen. Julianne Ortman, R-Chanhassen, has come up with as chair of the Senate Tax Committee (that we should look at tax breaks to special interest like spending for instance), but I can't agree with her analysis and some of her facts as detailed in a Strib oped published Wednesday.

First and biggest myth to bust, well, as a myth: The Legislature didn't raise property taxes local government's do.

That's generally true, but when the Legislature CHANGES the property tax formula that local governments  are REQUIRED BY LAW to use, the Legislature must take at least partial responsibility for increasing property taxes.

Most reasonable people would agree that if the local government does nothing, and the Legislature changes the way it must figure its tax rate, and tax increases happens, it falls to the government that did something (the Legislature) versus the one that did nothing (local governments).

I generally agree local governments are responsible for local property taxes, even if they do have to deal with uncertain state aid. Knowing it's uncertain, they should plan for that. But, when the Legislature changes the law that local governments MUST follow, then the Legislature, in effect, creates an increase in property taxes, all other things being equal.

The Legislature did try to lower property tax rates to make up for the loss of the credit, but as the Star Tribune editorial page points out, that was $30 million in relief, to make up for the lost of $260 million.

One-line takes on the news

Fed to buy $400 billion in long term treasuries, and also some mortgage backed securities

From NYTIMES:
The new effort is an experiment without a direct precedent, although the Fed tried something similar in the 1960s. Essentially, by shifting its money into riskier investments, the Fed hopes to drive down rates without expanding the size of its portfolio, as it has done twice in recent years.

By reducing the supply of long-term Treasuries, the Fed intends to force investors to accept lower rates of return on a wide range of riskier investments.

Economists project that the effort could reduce interest rates by a few tenths of a percentage point, a significant increment when multiplied by the vast extent of borrowing. The forecasting firm Macroeconomic Advisers estimated in advance of the Fed’s announcement — based on its best guess about the details of such a program — that the Fed’s efforts could add about 0.4 percentage points to economic output and create about 350,000 jobs

COMMENT: Interesting that Republican leaders were threatening that the Fed better not do anything to interfere with markets, which, essentially, is their mandate.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

News that deserves one-line responses

Welcome to a new feature of the Katojoe blog.

It's my Monday morning quarterbacking, Slats Grobnik take on news of the day with my promise to only use one sentence to comment on each story.

For you youngsters, Slats Grobnik was the composite character longtime Chicago Tribune columnist Mike Royko used to represent the "common man" if there is or was such a thing.

First story from MPR.

Dayton says Legislature is wasting time and money
Posted at 2:12 PM on September 20, 2011 by Tom Scheck (0 Comments)

Gov. Mark Dayton says he's none too pleased that Republicans in the House and Senate plan to hold hearings to discuss whether Dayton has the legal authority to allow people working for in-home daycare providers to join unions.

Dayton has said he's considering an executive order that would allow for those employees to vote on union membership, but he said he hasn't made a final decision. Dayton said lawmakers' decision to hold hearings before he takes any action is a "political ploy" and a waste of taxpayer money.

"Why don't they start by reforming themselves and recognize that they're a part-time Legislature that has been in session overtime all the way until the latter part of July?"

And he mocked committee chairs for holding hearings across the state on job creation - just weeks after the Legislature left St. Paul following the three week government shutdown.

"They had six months and they did very little on job creation," Dayton said.

"And I'm taking the initiative now, and we're proactively engaged in it as we will be for the three and a half years. So you missed your chance back then folks when taxpayers were paying for your salaries and your per diems."

Comment: Mark Dayton is usually a very reasonable sounding-guy, but this change of pace is interesting, sounds meaner, like Obama recently.

Next story:
From Washington Post

A $16 muffin, government finds extravagant spending at Justice Dept.

At a Justice Department conference, auditors said Monday in a report that doesn’t come close to topping the Pentagon’s legendary $400 hammer and $600 toilet seat but does, the auditors said, expose “wasteful or extravagant spending.’’

Cynthia Schnedar, the Justice Department’s acting inspector general, said in the report that some conferences featured “costly meals, refreshments and themed breaks” and that Justice failed to “minimize” costs as required by federal and internal guidelines.

Among the examples: Beef Wellington hors d’oeuvres at $7.32 per serving; a Cracker Jacks, popcorn and candy snack for $32 per person and coffee costing more than $1 per ounce, making a single cup $8.24.

And the $16 muffins? They were served at a 2009 legal training conference in Washington by Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review. The report describes the $4,200 spent on 250 muffins and $2,880 on 300 cookies and brownies


Comment: As a taxpayer, I feel they're making progress, only spending $16 on muffins versus $400 on a hammer.

 My favorite "Tweet" of the day from former Strib columnist and longtime Twin Cities journalist Nick Coleman.

"10 ways journalists can use Twitter... now, if we could just get journalists to try journalism... http://j.mp/qVEJSs"

As  I journalist I'm bowing to all the new waves of technology helping us do our jobs, believe me, but someone has to point out "journalism" is still the main job.


Tuesday, September 13, 2011

Republican debate, tea party, Blitzer

A few quick thoughts on the Republican debate on CNN Monday night.

I promise. They will be quick. It's way too early to be talking election politics.

It's a little troubling to me as a journalist that a fairly credible news organization like CNN would actually sponsor a debate with a political faction - the Tea Party Express in this case.

Would any independent voter view this as a slight crack in the network's credibility? I'll be interested to see if the smarmy Howard Kurtz or any other media critic takes them on in this issue or if this is the wave of the future.

 Scary if it is.

CNN was almost branding itself with Tea Party as a kind of combo meal you'd buy at McDonald's. The marketers went over the line.

I hope it troubles Wolf Blitzer, who is a solid, credible journalist and he did a solid job on running the debate and asking some tough questions.

I can't say the same for John King, who just softballed question after question to Michele Bachmann after the debate.

She's a bit desperate, taking off after Rick Perry on the "little girl forced vaccination" issue and John King did nothing to hold her accountable for the outrageous statements she was making.

She even got a little mean, saying even though Perry apologized, that wasn't good enough. Sheesh.

She knows there was an opt out, but kind of said, well, people should be told by government there's an opt out.
.
Well, they kind of were told by the government. It seems Bachmann wanted government to get even more involved saying the opt out wasn't adequate and people need to be told (in my interpretation government needs to hold their hand). That's just contradictory to her usual schtick that people take responsibility for their own lives and not rely on government that she was advocating earlier in the debate

Again, no challenge from King. His interview with her could have been a campaign commercial.

Ron Paul was kind of the comic relief here, and, actually, he makes a lot of sense some times, despite the comedy.

Blitzer nailed on the health care issue. As a doctor, Paul said he was against health care mandates but would not throw people out on the street if they didn't have it and needed care. (thus all the rest of us paying for it, Blitzer said.)

Paul said, in his day, the churches handled it. Enough said there. Hope my pastor was listening.

Romney made few mistakes, and I liked his line about telling Perry that Texas was doing well because when you're "dealt four aces, you aren't necessarily a good poker player."

Perry tried to respond with equal witt, but it fell flat. That's what happens when you have an uppity East Coast politician, former CEO, make fun of the good 'ol boy from Texas.

I still haven't heard an economic theory from any of them that allows people to check it empirically  — did this ever happen and can cause and effect be established kind of stuff —  and doesn't require them to just have the "belief" about the way the economy works.

Milton Friedman is turning in his grave.

Thursday, September 8, 2011

Ethical dilemmas of children testifying in murder case

For the first time in my experience in the newspaper business, it is likely we will see a child testifying in a murder case.

Blue Earth County District Court Judge Kurt Johnson ruled Tuesday that one of the three Munt children who witnessed their father shoot their mother will be allowed to testify as to what they saw.

Johnson had interviewed all three children, a girl who was 7 at the time of the killing, a boy who was 4 and a boy who was 5.

The girl will not be testifying after Johnson determined she was "significantly traumatized" and declined to speak to Johnson at all during the hearing, where Johnson says, he asked general questions, not questions about the case.

The younger boy also will not testify after Johnson determined he may not have been  mature enough to know everything that was going on or understand the court system.

The boy who was five at the time, may be called as a witness, Johnson ruled. He was able to answer general questions including the one where Johnson asked the children if they knew the difference between telling the truth and lying.

This case poses all kinds of ethical dilemmas for newspaper coverage and judges and lawyers as well. We're talking about a young boy who witnessed a traumatic event.

Will testifying further traumatize him? Will reading about his testimony and the case in the newspaper haunt him for the rest of his life? What kind of questions can appropriately be asked of a child who witnessed such traumatic events?

Defense attorneys have a job to cross-examine witnesses, to poke holes in their credibility. How pointed can questions be when asking a 5 year old? How much can the jury believe?

We will evaluate every question as we report the case and try to be sensitive to this young person's needs. At the same time, we'll balance that against what the public must know about not only this case, but the important ethical issues at stake.

If the boy is called to testify, he will testify in another courtroom away from the jury and his accused father.

That's a reasonable accommodation to what is likely to be another very difficult chapter in this young person's life.

Unfortunately, our court system relies on the testimony of witnesses, however difficult that may be at times.



Riding the "goattails" of a national story

Unless you have been out of the universe for the last week, you now know the tale of the little girls and the goat making Mankato famous.

It started with an unusual police report heard by the late night editors on The Free Press copy desk. Sometime around 11:30 p.m., a Mankato resident called police to report that two very young girls in their pajamas were walking along Carney Avenue north of Riverfront Drive, and, they had a goat with them.

The story gets better. When police stopped the girls they said they were simply taking their goat out for a late-night walk. They couldn’t remember their address, but they knew how to walk home, so the officer was obliged to follow.

By this time, the story had made all the police radio chatter and there were reportedly several other officers who drove by to see what must have been classic scene: their fellow officer escorting the two young girls and their goat. Apparently many cell-phone pictures were snapped. (This is yet to be confirmed part of the story, but we’ll use a little  journalistic license.)

The girls spun their tale thicker as they went on. They were hiding their goat in their closet because mom had bought it but dad wasn’t going to be too  happy about it once he found out.

Of course, eventually, police determined the girls had taken the goat from the Sibley Park zoo after hatching the plot earlier in the day when they were at Sibley Park for a birthday party.

As is likely to happen these days with such a bizarre and funny tale of a goat-napping, once the story made The Free Press website, it went viral.

This story was made for the modern-day, multi-platform media world we live in. It likely went  viral from The Free Press Facebook site, as the 2,000 or so people who are fans on the site likely forwarded it to their Facebook friends. If 2,000 Free Press fans have 10 friends each, we’ve just expanded our audience for this story by 20,000. If they have 100 friends each, the story expands by 200,000. And then those friends forward it to their friends and hence the “viral” nature of the story is developed.

Our Twitter posting and link to the story was also being “retweeted” around the globe. It was on the Drudge Report and in the Washington Post, as well as other media sites everywhere including USA Today and CBS Radio.

According to the last count, the story had been looked at 78,376 times, by almost 60,000 different users who spent an average of 3 minutes 48 seconds reading the story. And that’s just on The Free Press website. There is no accounting for how many times it was viewed on hundreds of media sites around the world.

The Associated Press picked up the story as well, and people commented on the story on The Free Press Facebook page from Tasmania, Australia to Melbourne, Fla.

 The comments varied from readers appreciating the humor and cuteness of the story to those suggesting the parents should be charged with neglect.

Clearly, it’s a story right out of Mayberry R.F.D. and maybe that’s what gives it so much appeal. Nothing horrendous happened to the girls. In an age where we hear and see so much brutality, this story seems to have given people a little bit of hope that there is still innocence in America.

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Interesting things I'm watching

From the file of interesting newsmaker interviews, I found Piers Morgan's interview with Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban on Monday night to include some very good political insights from a professional sports team owner.

Cuban said he doesn't like any of the presidential candidates of either party right now because they're all about "dogma" and philosophies and sound bites. None have offered an "action step" as Cuban says.

One can be for a lot of things, but until they lay out specific policies, none are being very honest. Well said, I thought. Voters should demand what Cuban demands: specific policies or in the business world "action" steps.

Here's the interview.


Monday, August 29, 2011

Been gone fishin`

I can't believe I haven't posted since early August.

I've been on vacation and then spending a lot of time catching up once I was back.

I did have good luck the last day I was fishing on Big Sand Lake near Park Rapids on Aug. 8.

Landed a 24-in., 5 pound walleye, with friend Gene Fladeboe directing me how and where to fish. Caught the walleye in 25 feet of water dragging bottom with a leech.

It's a rare catch in August in northern Minnesota, so I felt lucky.

As my friend and Free Press photographer John Cross tells me, "never brag about a fish unless you've got a picture."

Well. I do and here it is.


We did catch and release this guy as this was required by the slot limit for the lake.

Now, back to more boring things like politics and government!

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

'Round the Town: 21st Century version

This 'Round the Town column is a throwback to Free Press days of old. Back in the '70s it used to be a column just to let readers know what's happening "around the town."

The entries from Aug. 2, 1971 included "card club at the senior center, Katoans Book Club and Neurotics Anonymous at St. John's Episcopal Church."

About 40 years later we've got a few more things going for us.

With a nod to old traditions that may be good enough to resurrect, albeit through blogs, Facebook and Twitter, I'll give it a shot.

The Vikings are back in town, and that means about $5 million to the Mankato economy, according to the folks at the Greater Mankato Convention and Visitor's Bureau.

And Ribfest this weekend can't hurt the crowds as travelers could get a two-for on the Kato excursion. Here's our Ribfest preview story.

Ribfest held this year for the second time at Riverfront Park is expected to draw better and includes at least one more ribber than last year for a total of five, possibly more.

They've also nailed down three pretty impressive headline music acts with country act Tracy Lawrence, (Country always draws big) bluesy Big Head Todd and the Monsters and Little River Band, a longtime pop group with plenty of hits.

So the beer should be flowing and the ribs sizzling this weekend. Temperature are even supposed to be reasonable in the 80s.

More and more when I hear people who haven't been to Mankato in a while say what a great looking city is it. I'm going to say we're challenging Red Wing for the volume of green spaces we have in our city center.

The sculpture walk makes it even more attractive.

At a recent Mankato Moondogs game, I met a financial advisor from California who was on his way to a convention in Minneapolis, but enjoyed stopping at amateur ballparks around the country.

He said Mankato's Franklin Rogers Park was a real "nice ballyard."

Good to hear that term again. "Ball-yard"

Of course, Franklin Rogers was the editor of "Mankato Free Press" in 1971, and wrote a daily column called "Between Us" where he answered reader complaints, spoke of parking tickets and news of the day.

We'll maybe tackle that one another day.

Thursday, July 28, 2011

Keeping up on debt ceiling debacle

Here's a great resource for keeping up on the debt ceiling debate in Congress.

Articles are selected and reviewed for relevancy and accuracy by Pro Publica, a nonprofit journalism organization staffed by top editors who used to work at places like The Wall Street Journal, New York Times and Washington Post.


Here's the link to Pro Publica. They say they will be constantly updating it with new stories.

Friday, July 22, 2011

Budget deal impact on Mankato, outstate Minnesota

How will the Mankato region and outstate Minnesota be impacted by the recently approved state budget deal?

A few quick thoughts.

Health care, human services

Health care reforms will be a challenge for outstate providers. Reimbursement rates will be cut unless hospitals and others can prevent some tough medical cases (the poor on medical assistance) from returning to emergency rooms.

The reforms sound like a good way to save money, but remember, lots of these folks have mental illness and chronic conditions. Rural and outstate hospitals may have fewer resources to really make these "incentive" plans workable.

On the flip side, there should be a lot of opportunity for rural counties to join together in delivering services and setting up joint administrative centers for human services. There appear to be incentives to do these kind of collaborations. Some small counties have experience doing it already, so there's a model out there.

A little known provision in the final health and human services bill will blow a surprising hole in county budgets regarding payments for sex offenders:

Here it is:
Section 1 (246B.10) increase the county share for person civilly committed to the Minnesota Sex Offender Program from ten percent to 25 percent. This section is effective for all individuals who are civilly committed to the Minnesota Sex Offender Program on or after August 1, 2011.

Ouch. That will hurt, or it will create incentives for county attorneys to avoid committing sex offenders. That won't go over well with the public. 

K-12 education

With the state borrowing from schools, and thus schools having to borrow themselves to make up for 40 percent delay in payments, it will be tough on small districts who face cash flow issues and face declining enrollment already.

A $50 increase in the per-pupil formula will not help a district that is losing hundreds of students, or even 50.

I would  expect to see more stress on outstate school finances, and therefore, incentive to merge, like we saw recently with Le Center and Montgomery Lonsdale.

New required annual evaluations for teachers will be touchy for small school districts as everyone knows everybody and it will likely be a big cultural change at many schools that never had required evaluations.

Tying those evaluations to scores could also be problematic because students with risk factors for poor performance can be concentrated at small schools. One school in Mankato has 50 percent of its students that qualify for free or reduced priced lunches, while others are nowhere near that.

So, with teachers knowing they'll be evaluated based on student success, will there be an incentive to work at only the schools in neighborhoods that are middle class or well off?

Scores can be affected by small groups, but it's a positive that the local school boards and teacher reps will be able to choose what scores to use in measuring student progress.

Higher education

Of course, many regional centers have one or more state universities or community colleges. With cuts in the 10 percent range in higher education, it's clear these communities will be impacted with higher education job loss.

Minnesota State Mankato has cut approximately 100 high paying jobs over the last two years. Tuition will increase for kids going to school, which means they may have less to spend at the local malls, bars and restaurants.

Jobs

The $500 million bonding bill will help mitigate the job losses in outstate Minnesota where construction is typically slower. The bonding bill will also help mitigate some job loss from state employment, as the workforce is scheduled to be reduced by 6 percent through attrition.

The Mankato area has one of the highest concentrations of state employees in the state, almost 10 percent of wages, depending on how you measure it. Many other regional centers have the same kind of exposure to a state workforce.

The 15 percent cuts in jobs Republicans had proposed would obviously have had more impact.

Monday, July 11, 2011

Tom Horner: still willing to help solve budget problem

I spoke with former Independence Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner this morning.

He is visiting editors in southern Minnesota to say he is willing to help solve Minnesota's budget problem, much the same task he ran on in last year's election.

He has offered his help to both sides in the standoff. But, so far, no takers.

Horner suggests Dayton and GOP approve a narrow lights on bill and take two months to try to hammer out significant long-term spending and taxing reforms. Otherwise, he says, we'll simply be in the same spot two years from now.

He and former congressman and Independence Party gubernatorial candidate Tim Penny wrote an opinion piece for the Star Tribune suggestion solutions for a "third way" to solve the budget impasse.

That's simply a way for both sides to adopt solutions and still maintain their "core principles." Horner believes it can be done, even if Dayton doesn't get his "tax the rich" plan and even if Republicans don't get their "within our means" checkbook.

He was trying to drum up some attention in the state to get his former supporters, largely the independent voter in the middle, to contact Dayton and their legislators and urge an end to the shutdown and long-term reforms.

Horner suggests once the lights on bill is passed, the governor and the legislature should bring in experts to help them achieve goals like health care access and sustainable spending.

Horner is also sure the "third way" suggestion has to come from the governor's office.

I can't say I disagree a lot with what Horner has to say. The Free Press editorial board took a stand last year that Horner had the most reasonable budget proposal and that it involved necessary reforms.

I also urge readers to e-mail Dayton or their legislator. There are easy e-mail links here.

Friday, July 1, 2011

Observations on budget stalemate/shutdown

A few thoughts on events that have transpired in the last 24 hours on breakdown of budget negotiations.

When all is said and done, Republicans and Dayton are not that far apart on the numbers. We should be able to work this out. However, it was very surprising and troubling to me that Republicans would try to negotiate social issues back into the budget debate after Dayton had vetoed many of these proposals.

Here's the confidential Republican proposal to detailed social issues.

That just doesn't seem like a reasonable strategy.

Dayton is showing himself to be formidable governor in terms of using the bully pulpit to "frame" the issues.

His use of the phrases that Republicans are "against helping disabled people with personal care attendants" and yet not making millionaires "pay one more dollar," will resonate with a lot of people who are not millionaires - the "one dollar more" phrase in particular.

Of course, the millionaires would pay way more than "one dollar more" but Dayton framed it in a way that will make people really think about this.

He also took out the heavy artillary when he quoted one Republican legislator who said of the millionaires "some of these people are our friends."

Whether you believe it or not, it makes it sound like they're really concerned about their millionaire friends pocketbooks and not their willingness to create jobs.

And it sounds like Republicans are really holding onto their millionaire friends not because they provide jobs (as they continually state), but just because they dont' think they should be taxed at a higher rate (a position that would play out far worse than the job issue framing).

Republicans are doing all they can to blame the shutdown on Dayton. They were in House chamber ready to vote, which played OK, but most media put quotes from opposition higher in stories where opposition called it a grandstanding.

Note to Republicans. If you want to have journalists give you the benefit of a doubt every once in a while, you might not want to continually question their integrity, at least not in public. (CC to Sarah Palin).

On the Republican proposals to add $1 billion in revenue: Most people would not consider borrowing from schools and future tobacco funds as a "conservative" idea.

Finally on tax the rich: Dayton would do better here if he said "tax the rich the same as the middle class."

If you ask most people if the rich should pay 1) the same rate of tax as the middle class, 2) a higher rate, or 3) a lower rate, the vast majority will say the same or higher.

The Minnesota tax incidence study that both sides have used for their own purposes, shows the rich pay a LOWER RATE than the middle class considering all taxes.

As I've said before, this battle is for the moderate Republicans to win. I've talked to several who would go for more revenue in sales tax, income tax and in a variety of places, but they feel beholden to a party that will impart its wisdom with a stick and not a carrot.

If moderate (and many outstate) Republicans can pull it off, I think they'll be able to maintain control of both houses. If not, it could be all Democrats in 2012 and they will essentially turn back everything Republicans have done, which, incidentally, also wouldn't be good for the state.

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Five things Americans don't want to hear, but must

Let's face it, we're moving forward into times where a whole lot of things are going to change.

At state and federal levels, the budgets are in deficits, serious deficits.

Government workers are having benefits severely cut back as well as jobs and pay. Ditto for private sector.

There are solutions to these problems. There are better times ahead, but we have to, as Americans and Minnesotans, understand some hard truths.

1. Medicare must be cut. 

Yes. It's a great program. It has served many of our families and most importantly our elderly. But the exponential growth in the number of people who will qualify will create expenses that exceed our ability to pay for them.

Smart people and political leaders are trying to figure out how to deliver the same services more efficiently, but it may mean you talk to a diagnosis nurse on an 800 number before you get the personal meeting with your favorite doctor.

2. We can't completely protect ourselves from terrorists and others around the world.

We can, to a certain extent, but the number of groups, the number of unstable countries and the risk of nuclear weapons getting into the wrong hands are all on the rise.

It helps that we're trying to forge peacekeeping transitions in a lot of these countries, mostly Middle East, but it's hard to say this risk is decreasing.

3. We can't rely on the stock market as much as in the past as a solid investment for our retirement savings.

This confidence was shaken after the 2001 terrorist attacks and was somewhat regained until the financial crisis of 2008.

For years, baby boomers were told to leave your investments in one place. Over time the stock market is the best place.

I'm no expert, but it seems to me, the confidence in the stock markets has eroded with 2001 and 2008 events.

There are thousands of people who invested for their children's college education in 1995 who have a "cost basis" that is above what they have in that account. In other words, they lost money.

They will not have great confidence about investing again.

4. Voting matters less than it used to.

Corporations and organizations will have unlimited financial power, thanks to the Supreme Court, to influence elections. Corporations were cleared by the court to spend as much as they want on influencing elections, and in many cases, it can be kept secret.

5. These first four problems cannot be solved by the same old "passive American" democracy - that is, wait for a while, let the politicians handle it and because they want your vote, they'll fix it.

No. Americans are going to have to get much more "physically involved" in democracy in the future if we want change. It may be protesting at capitols or organizing groups over the Internet to recall politicians, but a "vote" may not be enough.

Democracy will require tools such as Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

"Public influence groups" will need to be formed with like-minded individuals to counter the power of  "private interest groups."

If this all sounds a little depressing, that's not the intent. Rather, I write these things because I have great confidence in the American tradition of democracy directed by the people.

Happy 4th of July!

Thursday, June 16, 2011

The most informative government shutdown/budget stalemate articles

Here's what I'm reading to stay informed on the impending government shutdown.

Eric Black's MinnPost story on Supreme Court setting a hearing on constitutionality of judiciary's role in keeping some parts of state running. 7/11/11. Major implications.

Another solid explanation of the impasse regards policy between Dayton and GOP by Elizabeth Dunbar, MPR. 7/11/11

Another good story by Elizabeth Dunbar of MPR on some real costs of a state shutdown. 

Star Tribune solid explanation of complicated budget numbers. GOP spending "not an increase."

Here's a solid opinion piece by Jim Mulder, former Independence Party candidate for lieutenant governor. It's a viable solution to the state budget stalemate.

Another good Doug Grow analysis from MinnPost. Friday, July 1.

Doug Grow's excellent analysis piece in MinnPost, Thursday, June 16.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

Good info from people smarter than me: Medicare

Here's one from experts at the Concord Coalition, the nonpartisan budget watchdog group.

Contrary to popular belief and Michele Bachmann, the previously inaccurately described "death panels" are not, cannot cut Medicare, but can and are needed to offer a promising way to curb health care costs and inefficiency.

Here's a solid article by Joshua Gordon of Concord Coalition showing these kind of "advisory" groups are often useful and key to solving big problems but are demagogued away by politicians.

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Gov. Dayton at Society of Professional Journalists banquet

A few quick observations from Gov. Mark Dayton's talk to the Society of Professional Journalists awards banquet in St. Paul Tuesday.

I talked to Dayton a month or so ago in Mankato. At that time, he said there was a 50-50 chance of coming to an agreement on the budget with Republicans.

Asked for an update Tuesday, Dayton said the odds are "less than 50-50."

That's alarming. It appears a government shutdown is imminent.

The other item of interest that drew the attention of other journalists at the event was the elimination of the early childhood funding bill (supported by both Democrats and Republicans and big money players like the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce).

Dayton said the bill was killed by a "tangential" fringe group, and Republicans bought the groups ideas.

Those ideas have been reported elsewhere as ones where the group feels all moms should stay at home to teach their children, and that government shouldn't do what parents should do.

Thursday, May 26, 2011

Human services budget seemed hijacked

Reviewing what the Legislature passed as a health and human services budget and Gov. Mark Dayton's veto of the plan, I get the feeling some good Republican ideas were sort of hijacked by over-reaching policy provisions that supported a national political campaign against the Affordable Health Care Act.

Whenever I've seen or heard Republican Chair of the House Health and Human Services Committee Jim Abeler, I've been impressed with his thoughtfulness. I've been convinced he sincerely wants to help people who can't afford health care to get treated and keep the costs reasonable to taxpayers.

That's why I was surprised to see things in the bill like the repeal of Gov. Mark Dayton's executive order on the early opt-in on Medicaid, something that would save the state millions and allow Minnesota to lead in health care cost reform.

It was disappointing to see provisions in the bill that Dayton described as "divisive policy provisions" that included prohibitions on stem cell research and provisions to somehow prevent the state from participating in the federal health care law.

Clearly, these were provisions that Dayton told legislators would draw a veto. They were in there anyway.

Abeler actually had some pretty good ideas in terms of controlling costs of state provided health care for the poor.

The experiment last year with GAMC patients that provided block grants to participating hospitals who worked with all providers as a team and improved outcomes at lower costs showed some success.

It's downfall was that outstate hospitals didn't participate because they said they couldn't afford a 50 percent reduction in their reimbursements.

That's the kind of reform that could have advanced the ball forward on this huge part of the state budget. But for some reason, all these controversial, divisive policy provisions got in there and scuttled the bill.

Obviously, a final bill needs to be reworked. Let's hope the political forces of the Republican Party let a smart guy like Abeler do his work.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

State budget dilemma: here's the crucial info

Outstate would be hurt more by GOP all-cuts budget.

14 Chambers of Commerce, many from outstate took the unusual and politically risky move of opposing Republican budget plan. Here's the story.

And here's a great backgrounder from Arne Carlson on the kind of fiscal situation Gov. Tim Pawlenty left us with. (Gives whole new meaning to Pawlenty's pronouncement in recent presidential bid that we have too much debt. He was the king of taking on debt!).

Carlson makes a key point: some budget cuts cost more in the future. Take cuts below needs to road funding during Pawlenty's administration.

Some 700 miles of highway are now in "poor" condition because we've never met the goal of 2 percent in poor in the last eight years.

When a state highway needs an overlay, if it's not in "poor" condition it costs about $130,000 per mile, according to MnDOT. When it goes to poor condition it costs three to six times more per mile, again, according to MnDOT.

The same thing can be said for health care. When Republicans reformed GAMC last year, they had to set aside $30 million for hospitals to draw from for all the folks that no longer qualified for GAMC as they came to hospital emergency rooms.

Some budget cutting does make sense - duplication of programs etc - but some absolutely makes no sense because we're not analyzing how it creates higher costs in the future.

Here's Dayton's detailed responses to Republican budget and story on same. His veto messages are unusual in that they carry very specific numbers, estimates from revenue and are worth reading.

Story with links to veto messages.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Sister paper in Joplin in the eye of the storm

Eighteen staffers who work at the Joplin Globe lost their homes Sunday. Another eight sustained severe damage.

Many came into work Sunday night to put out the newspaper nonetheless.

Here's a first person account of surviving storm by Joplin reporter.

The Globe is owned by The Free Press parent company, CNHI, and I've had different conversations with the staff and editors there over the years.

They are now dealing with battles on two fronts: many have friends and family whose homes and families have been devastated by the tornado, but as always, they're dedicating to informing their readers at this very critical time.

They're no doubt working tirelessly around the clock. Here's their web site http://www.joplinglobe.com/

I can only imagine what they are going through. I remember when the St. Peter tornado hit in 1998, though Mankato was not damaged, we had staffers who lived in St. Peter.

Newsrooms, like other places, can get a bit chaotic during these times. Who's available to cover what? How do we split it up? How do we convince authorities to let us through? Is the equipment and machinery working?

It's a very difficult time when newspapers have to cover the disasters that affect their staff personally. But it's no surprise they rise to the occasion. We often see the need to inform the public at these times are paramount. People need to know what happened, and more importantly that help is on the way.

The newspaper gives them something that is familiar, and it is one of those times when the community is drawn together by ink and paper.

We suspect the folks at the Joplin Globe will leave bundles of papers on downtown corners where they can be picked up by anyone, subscriber or not.

We've offered our help in whatever ways might be needed. Our company executives have also started a fund for families.

We can only keep our colleagues and the folks in Joplin in our thoughts and prayers.

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Vikings stadium battle intrigues

For more than 10 years, the Vikings under various owners have petitioned the Legislature to approve a stadium bill, now, among some of the toughest economic circumstances and the worst Legislative imbroglio, we have two proposals getting political support.

Go figure.

I like the Minneapolis Metrodome revamp proposal because it seems less costly and offers higher value for taxpayer money. On the other hand, I like the idea of options for tailgating at the Arden Hills site.

Thinking about where Vikings owners come from - New York Giants fans, ala Meadowlands, I'm not surprised the went for the more "romantic" option, the option the brings football back to its blue collar roots.

You presumably won't have to buy an $8 beer going to the game at Arden Hills, or at least you won't have to buy as many of them. You can bring your food and coolers to the tailgating party.

And we can even compete, in that respect, with Packer fans.

I also remember tailgating and excessive drinking gave Minnesota the reputation for the most high profile injuring of an NFL official. Somebody hit the ref with a whiskey bottled tossed from the seats. It was ugly.

The big money hangup appears to be the road infrastructure costs would exceed by in some estimates $100 million what the state was willing to pay into the project.

But if the commissioners in Ramsey County and road engineers are worth their salt, they'll find a way to come up with the money IF they really need that much.

StarTribune has been noting in its editorials favoring the Minneapolis site, that it has a land interest near the Metrodome site and the value of that land would be "affected" by that. They don't say how much.

So I'm torn. I like the idea of tailgating, and Arden Hills is not far from some of my old stomping grounds. And since Hennepin County said it couldn't afford another stadium, it may be Ramsey County's turn.

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Quarterly review of the truth of politicians

I thought it might be useful to every once in a while just help debunk the half-truths, lies and misleading statements various public figures propagate from time to time.

As Mark Twain once said: A lie can make it halfway around the world while the truth is just getting on its shoes.

That's mostly because the truth sometimes takes a lot of work, and most of it is done by journalists not beholden to political causes (bloggers) or corporate interests (we'll let you decide who that might be).

There's an oft repeated figure that Gov. Mark Dayton's budget is increasing spending 22 percent to 29 percent.

Minnesota Public Radio's Catherine Richert has done a great job debunking this claim on MPR's "Poligraph" feature. Here it is.

Essentially, her research, done in conjunction with the Humphrey Institute shows the real increase in Dayton's two-year budget from current two-year budget is about 8 percent.

That's because the Republicans and others who cite the 29 percent figure don't consider $4 billion or so in one-time federal stimulus money that was used and the school funding shift that we didn't put on the books, but we are nonetheless committed to pay.

Richert describes the 22 percent claims as "misleading." I agree, and think that is a rather generous assessment.

What people also don't understand about this raw number is that a lot of the increases are increases for more people accessing programs for which they are eligible. And the eligibility standards were often agreed to years ago by both parties.

So for politicians of either party to assess blame on one party or the other is also a bit misleading. Their colleagues, at one point or another, agreed to this level of eligibility.

If we're going to blame someone for out of control spending, blame those who set the eligibility standards years ago. You'll likely find blame with lots of folks from both parties.

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Bin Laden's dead body photos: Are we CSI?

There's been a long running debate if newspapers and media should publish images of death.

What makes a photo of a dead body newsworthy?

The issue has once again been raised with the possibility of the U.S. military releasing photos of a dead, and mostly likely bloody, shot-up Osama bin Laden.

Of course, there are no rules, only guidelines and judgments.

Without seeing the photos, it is always tough to make a decision. If the photo is extremely graphic, for example, one contemplates either not using it at all, or using it on an inside page, where it will not ruin the breakfast appetite of our readers.

On the other hand, the death of bin Laden was no ordinary death or even ordinary homicide. This was the most sought after terrorist in the world.

Would we expect our readers to endure more death images and more gore when we're mostly glad the man is dead?

We ask ourselves: What does this photo tell the readers that the story and the print can't or don't tell?

With conspiracy theorism on the rise in the U.S. (i.e. Obama's birth certificate), should we publish the "real McCoy" dead Osama photo to prove to such theorists they're wrong, and silly? Do we have to prove bin Laden is dead? Will a photograph in the newspaper prove that?

Maybe the photo tells us the degree to which bin Laden was shot. Once, twice, multiple times. Would that tell us the nature of the military tactics involved or shed light on the people who did the shooting?

Would the photo show us bin Laden was gaunt and skinny and weak or fat and sedentary? How much of this do we need to know?

Will we be able to sell more newspapers if we run the photo? Will our competition run it and we'll look stupid by not running it?

I can tell you that it would be my bet that more people would buy our newspaper off the newsstand (about 10 percent of all sales) if we had a picture of a dead bin Laden on the front.

Just my hunch after about 25 years experience in this business. That isn't always a reason to publish. Some of our longtime subscribers (90 percent of our circulation) might be offended and cancel their subscription.

Tell us what you think. We've set up a discussion on our Facebook page, (Facebook.com/mankatofreepress) or e-mail us at editor@mankatofreepress.com

Monday, May 2, 2011

Editor's picks: Bin Laden coverage

Roving the wire all day today and finding what seem to be interesting tidbits on the Bin Laden coverage.

I'll update regularly

Here's a Politico story quoting Rudy Giuiliani saying the "elation" feels strange. 

Bin Laden story getting reaction from Minnesota political leadering, including Rep. Tim Walz, John Kline

Interesting AP story: Inside the Bin Laden raid

Interpol's take on future of Al Qaida

Politico: Bin Laden used wife as a human shield

Politico reporter gives a few details on Bin Laden's burial at sea.