Category: Minnesota Politics

by Dave Mindeman

State Senator Jim Carlson should work for Target -- because he has that red and white circle on his back.

Four, count 'em, four Republicans have filed for the opportunity of running against Sen. Carlson in November. Gosh, you would think that job is a gold mine!

I was looking over the websites of this quadrangle of opposition. It made for a good read. Briefly....

Rob Lambert: This guy had a job as a professional fund-raiser. How convenient is that? And currently is a rep for medical device firm. He has roots in southern Minnesota working for Gil Gutknecht. He notes that he is a life long member of Hosanna Lutheran Church in Lakeville....the church that broke from the ELCA over its dispute with the synod over gay clergy. In regards to issues, this is another guy who doesn't seem to like details. Wants funding for education but magically pay for it with tax cuts again. As to health care, he praises the current system (best in the world) but no ideas or changes or cost efficiency offered. On his photo page, he doesn't have much either...a) a picture of him and Gil Gutknecht, b) a picture of him talking on a cell phone while driving (ahem), and c) waterskiing???

Mike Kaess: Kaess makes some "bold" statements on his website. In one paragraph he says, "For the past 14 years I have been a Business Development Manager and all postions in Minnesota." Apparently he worked his way up the ranks of United Parcel Service. Later in his introduction he says, "I believe that my experience in the global business world, for the past 30 years, has given me the knowledge and ability to help correct our current government." I find that puzzling -- global experience from a UPS white board? He talks about how progressive taxation of wealth and corporate taxes has failed (umm, is he talking about current tax policy?)

Ted Daley: New "kid" on the block. This guy has a long military history. West Point graduate. Deployed all over the world. Served in Iraq in 2008. Back to Eagan in 2009. Nothing wrong with that...thank him for his service. Not a lot of information and not much for new ideas. Little bit bland -- but hey, he just got started.

But the rest of our discussion will focus on David Carlson.

First -- no relation. Second, this guy seems to be shopping himself around looking for the right place to get into the legislature. He ran in 2008 in District 67B in East St. Paul. That's a pretty Democratic area and he lost badly.

But now he pops up in Eagan and although he says he is running for the endorsement, his intro clearly says this: David hopes to earn your support and your vote in the primary election September 14, 2010. Sounds like he will be in the primary regardless.

D.Carlson is also a fan of Twitter. Although a lot of his entries show his love for the Vikings, he throws some interesting off the cuff remarks as well. When the failed Christmas bomb attack was going on, Mr. D. Carlson threw in his desire to use "waterboarding". (Carlson has a long history in the military). But his biggest controversy with Twitter came when he re-tweeted a post that included a racial slur. The MNPUBLIUS blog couldn't let that pass without comment. I won't dignify it with a copy of what it said but you can see the screen shot here.

Now I'm going to be fair. This was a retweet from somebody else. D. Carlson did not write this himself. But then again, what was the value in repeating it? Especially to make some kind of attempt at defending Rush Limbaugh? Really?

Mr. D. Carlson felt the need to engage a defense on the MNPUBLIUS blog site --here is his first comment post:

I retweeted a comment encouraging President Obama to “take care of” Rush Limbaugh in Hawaii. I found it offensive and troubling, as we don’t kill off political opponents. By retweeting it, I wanted to draw attention to the death wishes that were being levied against a private citizen who had chest pains and was admitted to the ER. My subsequent tweets also discussed that point.

As someone who graduated from Johnson High School on the East Side of Saint Paul, played on an all black basketball team, and has coached the summer program there, which happened to also be all black, I find it rather disingenuous to try and label me a racist. Perhaps, you should go ask the team that I helped receive a $2,000 grant for this season if they think I am a racist.

And for the record, the comment is still on my twitter as I didn’t take it off because I didn’t see anything wrong with retweeting it then, and I don’t today. Again, because I retweeted the comment, that does not mean that I CONDONE OR ENDORSE the comment. I simply wanted to expose wishes of death towards someone that I found a bit shocking and quite frankly, I was surprised at them. And for the record, I am not a “birther.”

Sincerely,

David J. Carlson

Hmmm, the phrase "me thinks he doth protest too much" comes to mind....but I digress.

Now I suspect what D. Carlson is saying is true. He is not condoning or endorsing what was said. However, since Twitter is a public forum, why repost this trash at all? It questions Mr. Carlson's judgment if nothing else.

But that is not the entire picture here either.

During that 2008 election in 67B, D. Carlson's campaign also drew the attention of the MNPUBLIUS blog with some questionable campaign literature. I would encourage you to examine the posting and the literature in question HERE.

The fear tactic involved with this is deeply troubling. Nobody, I mean nobody, is "soft" on violent crime. Legislative votes on public safety issues are always full of potential complications as well as funding problems. To try and link violent crimes to votes on public safety funding is a vulgar tactic. Republicans have resorted to this tactic way too often and to me it is detestable.

(As for the discussion about "doctoring" the photo...well, I will just leave that to your own judgment.)

If Mr. D. Carlson wants a vigorous discussion of the issues, I am sure Senator Jim Carlson is ready to become fully engaged. But if his district has to be subjected to "more of the same" in unfair attacks and distortions, then, please, Mr. David Carlson, save it all for your twitter account.

Category: Economy

by Dave Mindeman

I was watching CNBC last week, listening to a discussion of the stimulus package. Of course, since financial networks tend to side with Wall Street (they pay the bills), the Obama Stimulus was getting a good bashing. One person was trying to defend it against a rabid partisan analyst and pretty much getting nowhere. Finally, the stimulus defender broke through the noise and asked a simple question --

"At this moment, do you think that the US economy can stand on its own feet without government intervention?"

The analyst looked a little bit troubled and was quiet for just a few moments.... then finally, he said, "Well, no, it can't..." After which he added a "but" and then quickly proceeded to go back to bashing spending programs again.

I worry somewhat that Obama is letting the political spin of the day influence his decision making regarding the economy. I get concerned with a news report such as this:

Obama: Cutting Deficit is as Important as Job Growth

The simple response to that is NO -- the Deficit is NOT as important as job growth. We are in a slow recovery, very slow. Job growth is always a lagging indicator. Last week's 5.7% increase in GDP was a good thing, but it is not an indicator of sustained economic activity. Most people attribute it to restocking inventories. What happens after the restocking is the critical economic outlook.

I was encouraged by Obama's visit to the House Republicans yesterday. He put up a vigorous defense of his policies. And he exposed the Republican talking points for what they are -- empty words. Claims without numbers and concrete policy is meaningless.

But Obama seems to be taking up the political worry about the deficit numbers. It is OK to worry; they will need to be dealt with at some point.

But now is not the time.

Economic growth and stability will be the best engine of revenue we can have. People have to get back to work. That is when the numbers will begin to turn around. Unemployment checks will turn into tax withholding and that will, in turn, shrink that deficit.

Spending cuts don't produce job growth. Taking government money out of the economy at this juncture will cost us more jobs and take away supplemental revenue for businesses.

Obama's original mistake was that the stimulus package was just too small to jolt the economy into a quick recovery. He opted for the politically safer smaller stimulus. It has helped but the recovery is now painfully slow.

The best policy going forward would be to push a second stimulus package -- to jolt the economy once more and firm up an economic foundation. But that, of course, is now politically impossible.

However, trying to do deficit reduction in the midst of a weak and vulnerable recovery is an even worse option. Maybe Obama holds the belief that by the time deficit reduction policies take hold, the economy will once again be vibrant and moving again.

I hope that is correct -- but I would not take that to the bank -- especially a Wall Street bank.

Category: Economy

by Dave Mindeman

The House DFL tax committee chairwoman, Ann Lenczewski unveiled a DFL jobs proposal consisting of tax breaks. These are good proposals and if things weren't so partisan these days, I bet they would just sail through.

A couple of things to note.

There is a Mall of America expansion incentive (what is it now, the third try?) in there. Seems to use the generated sales taxes at the Mall to pay for its own expansion. Yes. Please, let's get this puppy started. The MOA people are looking at it and opening impressions are somewhat favorable:

Mall of America spokesman Dan Jasper said in a statement that mall officials have not seen Lenczewski's proposal for their project but are eager to learn the details. He said they are exploring the possibility of moving the second phase from a single-phase construction project to multiple phases in order to complete it in a "still difficult economic environment." "We are encouraged by the announcement today and hopeful that it can help us get started on the first phases of expansion," Jasper said.

Those are good construction jobs -- and should have been in the works long ago.

Another of Lenczewski's proposals involves angel investor tax credits. There's been a bit of a question regarding making it a credit or a deduction. Lenczewski believes the credit is more productive. Maybe so. But Wisconsin is way ahead of us on this front -- this needs to move as well.

Other parts of the bill deal with manipulation of local city and county tax increment financing to make contruction and business expansion more attractive. Fine. Let's do it.

Some of these ideas are not new and quite frankly, should have been done over the last two years. But between GOP complaints and Governor vetos, everything gets delayed and diluted.

Some more of that talk accompanies Lenczewski's proposal:

Kurt Zellers, House Minority Leader:

The leading House Republican, Minority Leader Kurt Zellers, of Maple Grove, said the DFL package was a "good starting point" but a relatively small one that is "not quite enough to get us over the hump."

Just once I would like to hear a Republican, any Republican, say..."yes, that sounds great. Let's pass that right now and get jobs moving." Is that too much to ask? Every proposal that comes forward from the DFL leadership can never be accepted on its face...."too much, not good enough, too little, too late."

Is the word "YES" voided out of the GOP vocabulary?

Pawlenty can't resist either:

"Gov. Pawlenty has long championed an angel investment tax credit and hopes the DFL will break from their pattern of including it in a bill that gets vetoed, because it also has a truckload of other job-killing tax increases," Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung said in an e-mail.

C'mon Governor, jobs are on the line. Gosh, maybe your office should just write the bills as well. You do remember that the legislature still gets to be involved, right?

Move something people.....your constituents are ready to get to work.

Somebody just has to say, YES, I AGREE. Is that so hard?