Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer is racking up kudos from Mankato to Minneapolis.
On Saturday, The Free Press gave Emmer a thumbs up for basically saying he was going to be reasonable when it came to challenging the recount. He said he would make sure nothing extraordinary was happening and then if the margin is still fairly large, 8,700 votes or thereabouts, he would be done.
He went on to say that he wasn't going to put everyone through a futile effort.
Emmer also got a good 700- to 800 words of praise from Minneapolis Star Tribune columnist Nick Coleman, who had much good to say about Emmer's sportsmanship. Many of Coleman's readers were at the very least surprised, and possibly some shocked, as he is not want to heap a lot of praise on many Republicans.
Coleman said Emmer "deserves great appreciation" and that kind of "leadership" is "rare."
Emmer has in the past been described a the bulldog of the Republican Party, especially when he was in the Legislature. But a long campaign for governor, hearing and seeing the hopes, wants and desires of average Minnesotans, may tend to have a calming effect on any candidate.
When I hosted the gubernatorial debate in Mankato, I thought one of the best and most sincere statements Emmer made came when he was asked to pick a former governor he respected. He said something to the effect that he respects anyone and everyone who has put themselves through a campaign and made sacrifices simply because they believe they can make the state better for future generations.
Emmer's recounts statement has hints of those beliefs. Good for him.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Friday, November 26, 2010
Talk about a death panel!
Here's some info on the fact sheet for a government health care program.
Let's see if you can guess where it comes from and which political party approved this.
This was a letter sent to people who are enrolled in a government-sponsored health program based on need and eligibility
"Why am I getting this letter?"
"The way you get your health care services is changing. Starting June 1, only certain hospitals will give
you services."
"What does this change mean for me?
• Services you are currently getting may not be covered.
• You may need to go to a different doctor or clinic.
• Services by this group of doctors is limited and there may not be one in your county.
• If you do not choose a group the government has required, your coverage is limited to prescription drugs.
You may have to pay for other medical services including the doctor visit to get a prescription."
So, in essence, you won't get to choose your own doctor
Some services might no longer be covered.
There may not be a approved doctor in your county, so you'll have to travel.
And if you don't like the government's choice of doctors, you're out of luck.
I point this out only because these were almost identical to the fears raised with the national health care reform put out by Democrats last year.
I've always believed when the so called "death panel" talk came out as Congress was debating the health care reform bill, that it was pure and unmitigated B.S. from the start. We won't go into that here.
But what most people don't realize is that there are instances happening at state and federal level that will restrict what doctor you can see and de facto put government and insurance companies in control of your medical care.
Like the example above: They are the actual rules for the General Assistance Medical Care program approved by Republicans and Democrats in Minnesota. To be fair, Democrats had proposed a program that would cover more and cost more. Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty vetoed that in lieu of the a program that cost less and covered less.
However you see the issue, clearly, when government pays your medical bill, they're going to have something to say about the care, which doctors you see.
This should be a reality check for all of us.
Let's see if you can guess where it comes from and which political party approved this.
This was a letter sent to people who are enrolled in a government-sponsored health program based on need and eligibility
"Why am I getting this letter?"
"The way you get your health care services is changing. Starting June 1, only certain hospitals will give
you services."
"What does this change mean for me?
• Services you are currently getting may not be covered.
• You may need to go to a different doctor or clinic.
• Services by this group of doctors is limited and there may not be one in your county.
• If you do not choose a group the government has required, your coverage is limited to prescription drugs.
You may have to pay for other medical services including the doctor visit to get a prescription."
So, in essence, you won't get to choose your own doctor
Some services might no longer be covered.
There may not be a approved doctor in your county, so you'll have to travel.
And if you don't like the government's choice of doctors, you're out of luck.
I point this out only because these were almost identical to the fears raised with the national health care reform put out by Democrats last year.
I've always believed when the so called "death panel" talk came out as Congress was debating the health care reform bill, that it was pure and unmitigated B.S. from the start. We won't go into that here.
But what most people don't realize is that there are instances happening at state and federal level that will restrict what doctor you can see and de facto put government and insurance companies in control of your medical care.
Like the example above: They are the actual rules for the General Assistance Medical Care program approved by Republicans and Democrats in Minnesota. To be fair, Democrats had proposed a program that would cover more and cost more. Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty vetoed that in lieu of the a program that cost less and covered less.
However you see the issue, clearly, when government pays your medical bill, they're going to have something to say about the care, which doctors you see.
This should be a reality check for all of us.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Fireworks at the Supreme Court and other incendiary reports
The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled quickly and decisively 5-zip against the first, and so far only, challenge by the Tom Emmer campaign to the gubernatorial election results.
A MinnPost report by Jay Weiner again is the credible and interesting report I am relying on. He even offers a little "dark and stormy night" drama in this one. Hey, it's one way to make public affairs reporting interesting!
What I found interesting about the ruling was that it was issued without an opinion, so as "not to impede the orderly election process." The court seemed to be hinting that another challenge might have to really provide earth shattering new information, or the court, mostly Pawlenty-appointed, would reject that as well. Just my guess, though.
In my opinion, any further challenge without such significant backing will come off as frivolous to the judges, and when judges think you're wasting their time, the don't get mad, they get even, or they get mad and even.
I've seen many a judge use the rule that "their impartiality ends where your frivolity begins."
News reports called the ruling from Pawlenty-appointees "terse." Maybe it's payback for Emmer who called them "activist" last year after they ruled Pawlenty's unallotment was illegal. Pawlenty was kinder but said the ruling was "unwise."
Republicans challenge at their peril here. As I mentioned in Wednesday's editorial, "voters can forgive politicians for a lot of things, but not for denying them the right to have their vote counted." Any challenges from Emmer, at this point, seem to be playing with fire near a propane tank.
There's some sound reasoning behind a recount of votes making a difference with regard to the Emmer petition and several counties filed information to that effect.
Recount wouldn't stack up
Here's the good info from a solid Pioneer Press report on the issue by Jason Hoppin.
Noteworthy is Blue Earth County's own expert Patty O'Connor, election director.
In Anoka County, election judges were able to reconcile the ballots in all precincts but one. Out of 131,700 votes, officials said there was no evidence that the sole extra ballot was cast by anyone other than a legitimate voter.
In Ramsey County, officials said there were just five unexplained ballots out of more than 192,000 cast but that there was no reason to toss out those five.
In Hennepin County, Minnesota's largest, officials found discrepancies in 15 precincts for a total of 22 ballots and said they would work to resolve the discrepancies but did not want to throw out votes.
Together Anoka, Hennepin and Ramsey County cast nearly 800,000 votes in the Nov. 2 election, or about 39 percent of the statewide total. With Emmer needing to close a nearly 9,000-vote gap, they found just 28 unexplained ballots between them.
Some local officials contacted by the Pioneer Press said they also have found few extra ballots. Officials in Goodhue County, which follows the procedure sought by the GOP, found discrepancies, but none that could not be explained. And Carver County officials found only a few extra ballots but said they appeared to be caused by election judges themselves forgetting to sign the register when they voted.
In an affidavit, Hennepin County election manager Rachel Smith argued that counting voter receipts is actually a more accurate way of tallying voters than counting signatures, calling the method "universally preferred."
That was backed up by others, including Blue Earth County Auditor Patty O'Connor, who said the problem with counting signatures is that voters sometimes don't sign the register, even though they are required by law to do so.
"You have to remember, I'm in outstate Minnesota, where we all know each other," O'Connor said, adding that it's easy to forget to follow the letter of the law when chit-chatting with a friendly face. "The wife signs and the husband doesn't, and off they go."
A MinnPost report by Jay Weiner again is the credible and interesting report I am relying on. He even offers a little "dark and stormy night" drama in this one. Hey, it's one way to make public affairs reporting interesting!
What I found interesting about the ruling was that it was issued without an opinion, so as "not to impede the orderly election process." The court seemed to be hinting that another challenge might have to really provide earth shattering new information, or the court, mostly Pawlenty-appointed, would reject that as well. Just my guess, though.
In my opinion, any further challenge without such significant backing will come off as frivolous to the judges, and when judges think you're wasting their time, the don't get mad, they get even, or they get mad and even.
I've seen many a judge use the rule that "their impartiality ends where your frivolity begins."
News reports called the ruling from Pawlenty-appointees "terse." Maybe it's payback for Emmer who called them "activist" last year after they ruled Pawlenty's unallotment was illegal. Pawlenty was kinder but said the ruling was "unwise."
Republicans challenge at their peril here. As I mentioned in Wednesday's editorial, "voters can forgive politicians for a lot of things, but not for denying them the right to have their vote counted." Any challenges from Emmer, at this point, seem to be playing with fire near a propane tank.
There's some sound reasoning behind a recount of votes making a difference with regard to the Emmer petition and several counties filed information to that effect.
Recount wouldn't stack up
Here's the good info from a solid Pioneer Press report on the issue by Jason Hoppin.
Noteworthy is Blue Earth County's own expert Patty O'Connor, election director.
In Anoka County, election judges were able to reconcile the ballots in all precincts but one. Out of 131,700 votes, officials said there was no evidence that the sole extra ballot was cast by anyone other than a legitimate voter.
In Ramsey County, officials said there were just five unexplained ballots out of more than 192,000 cast but that there was no reason to toss out those five.
In Hennepin County, Minnesota's largest, officials found discrepancies in 15 precincts for a total of 22 ballots and said they would work to resolve the discrepancies but did not want to throw out votes.
Together Anoka, Hennepin and Ramsey County cast nearly 800,000 votes in the Nov. 2 election, or about 39 percent of the statewide total. With Emmer needing to close a nearly 9,000-vote gap, they found just 28 unexplained ballots between them.
Some local officials contacted by the Pioneer Press said they also have found few extra ballots. Officials in Goodhue County, which follows the procedure sought by the GOP, found discrepancies, but none that could not be explained. And Carver County officials found only a few extra ballots but said they appeared to be caused by election judges themselves forgetting to sign the register when they voted.
In an affidavit, Hennepin County election manager Rachel Smith argued that counting voter receipts is actually a more accurate way of tallying voters than counting signatures, calling the method "universally preferred."
That was backed up by others, including Blue Earth County Auditor Patty O'Connor, who said the problem with counting signatures is that voters sometimes don't sign the register, even though they are required by law to do so.
"You have to remember, I'm in outstate Minnesota, where we all know each other," O'Connor said, adding that it's easy to forget to follow the letter of the law when chit-chatting with a friendly face. "The wife signs and the husband doesn't, and off they go."
Friday, November 19, 2010
Hoping to bring great budget debate to Mankato
I'm hoping to convince the Citizens League of Minnesota to bring one of their intriguing budget debate meetings to Mankato in the near future.
The Citizens League, a non partisan and credible research group, has through a grant with the Bush Foundation set up some 30 plus meetings around the state, in small towns and big, to gather citizens for a night of discussion on how to solve the state's estimated $6 billion budget deficit.
There's a good report on one of the recent meetings in MinnPost.
I recently spoke with Citizens League Executive Director Sean Kershaw and when I saw he didn't have Mankato on the list for a meeting, I recommended we get one. I told him I believe Mankato was a community that could be very engaged in this process and he'd get a good turnout.
He sounded like he was going to pursue it. I spoke with him at a recent meeting of the University of Minnesota Frank Premack Public Affairs Journalism board, of which we are both members.
The Free Press will do everything it can to help bring about this meeting, including participating in it and publicizing it. I'm hoping to hear back from Kershaw soon. Will update when I know.
The Citizens League, a non partisan and credible research group, has through a grant with the Bush Foundation set up some 30 plus meetings around the state, in small towns and big, to gather citizens for a night of discussion on how to solve the state's estimated $6 billion budget deficit.
There's a good report on one of the recent meetings in MinnPost.
I recently spoke with Citizens League Executive Director Sean Kershaw and when I saw he didn't have Mankato on the list for a meeting, I recommended we get one. I told him I believe Mankato was a community that could be very engaged in this process and he'd get a good turnout.
He sounded like he was going to pursue it. I spoke with him at a recent meeting of the University of Minnesota Frank Premack Public Affairs Journalism board, of which we are both members.
The Free Press will do everything it can to help bring about this meeting, including participating in it and publicizing it. I'm hoping to hear back from Kershaw soon. Will update when I know.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Essential news and analysis worth reading
There's a solid analysis by MinnPost reporter Jay Weiner on the current gubernatorial recount effort and the Republican lawsuit.
Weiner of course wrote award-winning stories on the Coleman-Franken recount and now has a book out about it called "This is not Florida."
His piece in MinnPost is a solid and enlightening analysis by a journalist who had in-depth knowledge of this issue and the complicated legal proceedings that can surround it. You'll get a feel for the likelihood of success for the GOP court challenge.
He also talks to Blue Earth County's own Patty O'Connor, longtime elections director and on the board of the statewide election officials organization. She provides some interesting insights on his own.
He also provides lots of links to past rulings, current court statements and basically everything you need to understand and get up to speed on this issue.
What I like about Weiner's journalism is that he digs deep into places others don't even know about -- Minnesota administrative rules on elections, for example.
Weiner of course wrote award-winning stories on the Coleman-Franken recount and now has a book out about it called "This is not Florida."
His piece in MinnPost is a solid and enlightening analysis by a journalist who had in-depth knowledge of this issue and the complicated legal proceedings that can surround it. You'll get a feel for the likelihood of success for the GOP court challenge.
He also talks to Blue Earth County's own Patty O'Connor, longtime elections director and on the board of the statewide election officials organization. She provides some interesting insights on his own.
He also provides lots of links to past rulings, current court statements and basically everything you need to understand and get up to speed on this issue.
What I like about Weiner's journalism is that he digs deep into places others don't even know about -- Minnesota administrative rules on elections, for example.
Cal Thomas agrees with me, and other thoughts
Free Press conservative columnist and Foxnews contributor Cal Thomas agrees with me on a number of things.
He writes in his column in Thursday's Free Press that "Individuals who make wise decisions, care for themselves and refuse Social Security and Medicare (which should be means tested), should get tax breaks."
I'm all for the tax breaks for people who can show they won't be a burden on government, but more than that, I'm all for making Social Security and Medicare means tested. Bill Gates shouldn't be eligible. Nor should Warren Buffet, who actually probably wouldn't mind, but as long as these folks have a free gift handed to them, why wouldn't they take it.
Actually, Social Security is kind of means tested now, those who mean to retire 30 years from won't get it, or will get much less than anyone who's getting it now. But, it is basically a welfare program, so if we're trying to provide things to people who need them, let's make it dependent on income.
The flip side of the tax breaks for people who take care of themselves, it a reduction in tax breaks for corporations that cost us more money. Thomas agrees with me on this too, as he has endorsed the federal spending cuts and reduction of tax breaks advocated by the Heritage Foundation.
Of course, Cal doesn't have to run for office, so he can go around saying things like that. I've not heard it from anyone who has a real stake in the game, but we'll be watching closely the new powers that be in Washington.
Bush popularity likely rising
Today's Free Press editorial gives due respect to President George W. Bush for the tales in his recent book, and his willingness to accept responsibility and talk plainly about some of the mistakes and successes of his presidency.
I watched NBC's Matt Lauer interview W. and will say it's the most impressed I've ever been with the former president, mainly because he acknowledged his mistakes, and took full out responsibility for the bank bailouts saying anyone who believes Obama started the TARP program is dead wrong.
He said he believes in free market principles, but when experts told him the banking system could collapse and create a depression, he believed them and did what he believes was the right thing by authorizing TARP.
That action is the essence of what we should expect our presidents to do. It's sometimes lost on the angry crowd of "low information voters." (I like that term).
He also showed great respect for the presidency by refraining from criticizing Obama. I think he knows Obama is doing a pretty good job. Whenever you've been there, you're a little more reluctant to throw stones. We can't say as much for the former vice president.
Good job, W. :)
He writes in his column in Thursday's Free Press that "Individuals who make wise decisions, care for themselves and refuse Social Security and Medicare (which should be means tested), should get tax breaks."
I'm all for the tax breaks for people who can show they won't be a burden on government, but more than that, I'm all for making Social Security and Medicare means tested. Bill Gates shouldn't be eligible. Nor should Warren Buffet, who actually probably wouldn't mind, but as long as these folks have a free gift handed to them, why wouldn't they take it.
Actually, Social Security is kind of means tested now, those who mean to retire 30 years from won't get it, or will get much less than anyone who's getting it now. But, it is basically a welfare program, so if we're trying to provide things to people who need them, let's make it dependent on income.
The flip side of the tax breaks for people who take care of themselves, it a reduction in tax breaks for corporations that cost us more money. Thomas agrees with me on this too, as he has endorsed the federal spending cuts and reduction of tax breaks advocated by the Heritage Foundation.
Of course, Cal doesn't have to run for office, so he can go around saying things like that. I've not heard it from anyone who has a real stake in the game, but we'll be watching closely the new powers that be in Washington.
Bush popularity likely rising
Today's Free Press editorial gives due respect to President George W. Bush for the tales in his recent book, and his willingness to accept responsibility and talk plainly about some of the mistakes and successes of his presidency.
I watched NBC's Matt Lauer interview W. and will say it's the most impressed I've ever been with the former president, mainly because he acknowledged his mistakes, and took full out responsibility for the bank bailouts saying anyone who believes Obama started the TARP program is dead wrong.
He said he believes in free market principles, but when experts told him the banking system could collapse and create a depression, he believed them and did what he believes was the right thing by authorizing TARP.
That action is the essence of what we should expect our presidents to do. It's sometimes lost on the angry crowd of "low information voters." (I like that term).
He also showed great respect for the presidency by refraining from criticizing Obama. I think he knows Obama is doing a pretty good job. Whenever you've been there, you're a little more reluctant to throw stones. We can't say as much for the former vice president.
Good job, W. :)
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
GMG Hall of Fame: a big crowd, compelling stories
The Greater Mankato Growth Hall of Fame awards banquet at the Verizon Center last night drew one of the biggest crowds ever, filling dozens of tables in the main ballroom.
The local chamber group has expanded its array of awards this year that included some "design" awards, recognizing business projects that add an interesting and attractive physical aspect to the community. That was a nice addition for recognition. The way a city looks says a lot about the commitment of its business owners and city leaders.
This list of award winners can be found on The Free Press website, along with Tim Krohn's coverage.
Here's some videos of top three award winners that are short and worth watching.
There were, as always, many great stories about people starting out in business. Many had very humble beginnings and just worked liked crazy to make things happen.
It was very clear listening to owners speak about their businesses, that they all had one thing at the top of their list: serving customers. Many did not dwell on their own expertise or their staff's acumen, but thanked the people in the room and the community at large for being their customers.
It was also great to see that the Hall of Fame Inductees - the Abdo, Eick and Meyers Accounting firm and Mankato Independent Originals started as small family businesses. You often hear how chains or big box retailers can have such an advantage over small homegrown businesses, but that is clearly not the case with these two winners.
Mankato Independent Originals - Patrick and Chris Person and Tasha O'Hara - run four independent unique restaurants, including Neighbors, Dino's, Tav on the Ave. and Number Four. Their business started with Pat and Chris's parents, Adrian and John Person who for years ran Adrian's restaurant.
The Abdo firm was founded by longtime Mankato businessman Joe Abdo, who started out working for another longtime family business - Schwickert Hardware store.
All in all, it was a solid event and business winners were no doubt an inspiration to those in attendance.
The local chamber group has expanded its array of awards this year that included some "design" awards, recognizing business projects that add an interesting and attractive physical aspect to the community. That was a nice addition for recognition. The way a city looks says a lot about the commitment of its business owners and city leaders.
This list of award winners can be found on The Free Press website, along with Tim Krohn's coverage.
Here's some videos of top three award winners that are short and worth watching.
There were, as always, many great stories about people starting out in business. Many had very humble beginnings and just worked liked crazy to make things happen.
It was very clear listening to owners speak about their businesses, that they all had one thing at the top of their list: serving customers. Many did not dwell on their own expertise or their staff's acumen, but thanked the people in the room and the community at large for being their customers.
It was also great to see that the Hall of Fame Inductees - the Abdo, Eick and Meyers Accounting firm and Mankato Independent Originals started as small family businesses. You often hear how chains or big box retailers can have such an advantage over small homegrown businesses, but that is clearly not the case with these two winners.
Mankato Independent Originals - Patrick and Chris Person and Tasha O'Hara - run four independent unique restaurants, including Neighbors, Dino's, Tav on the Ave. and Number Four. Their business started with Pat and Chris's parents, Adrian and John Person who for years ran Adrian's restaurant.
The Abdo firm was founded by longtime Mankato businessman Joe Abdo, who started out working for another longtime family business - Schwickert Hardware store.
All in all, it was a solid event and business winners were no doubt an inspiration to those in attendance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)