Fire Sale in Detroit City

The American Interest's Walter Russell Mead is calling attention to the bankruptcy sale now underway for the City of Detroit.  The City is looking at selling some of its museum's priceless art collection.  (Priceless?  We'll find out soon.)

How did it come to this?  Mead explains,

"This is another grim reminder of just how destructive Detroit’s corrupt machine politics have been.  At one time, Detroit was the manufacturing capital of America and one of the country’s great cities; today it’s trying to stave off a kind of modern-day bonfire of the vanities."

Those same liberal/progressive policies that led inevitably, inexorably to Detroit's bankruptcy are the policies we are adopting in one-party-rule Minnesota.  Remember, Michigan was years ahead of us in forcing the unionization of home child care providers.

We Need a Reform Conservatism

Ross Douthat, the New York Times’ only conservative columnist, posted a helpful piece today on “What Is Reform Conservatism?  An agenda for an almost-movement.”

I met Ross a few weeks ago when he was in town to give a talk on his latest book, before a packed house.  I think he is someone we should be listening to.

Ross concedes in his post today that the idea of reform conservatism “has not exactly caught fire within the G.O.P.”  When you are fighting against the daily catastrophes brought on by one-party rule—as we are in Minnesota—or the too-many-scandals-too-count in Washington, it’s tough to look longer term at ideas worth implementing when (not if) we are back in power.

I’m optimistic that—in Minnesota—we may be back in 2014, so now is the time for building a consensus around a positive agenda for change in state government.

Last month I made a few suggestions to get started on a reform agenda for Minnesota.  Today, Ross offers a six point agenda that is useful as a starting point for discussions.  I wish he would have included a point on education reform (as I did) but that is more a quibble than a criticism.

More useful for the idea of establishing a conservative reform agenda are the two premises Ross’ articulates as underlying his thinking on the subject.

First, Ross discusses the need for “making family life more affordable, upward mobility more likely, and employment easier to find.”

Second, Ross names that the biggest hurdle to making that happen,

The existing welfare-state institutions we’ve inherited from the New Deal and the Great Society, however, often make these tasks harder rather than easier:  Their exploding costs crowd out every other form of spending

I’ve made exactly that same point before.  You would think that we would share common ground with those on the other side of the fence who genuinely want to help the needy.  The No. 1 reason why there is not more money to help the neediest?  Because of the huge share of our budget devoted to programs that we know don’t work.

Ross’ conclusion,

So we don’t face a choice between streamlining the welfare state and making it more supportive of work and family; we should be doing both at once.

Just as important are the items that Ross lists that should not be part of a conservative reform agenda:  no cap and trade, no more tax increases, etc.

I agree with the idea that we need something of a conservative reform movement.  Let’s get started.

The Dems' Sales Tax Shakedown

In the previous edition of The Column, I mentioned the 400-page tax bill passed by the Minnesota state legislature in the waning seconds of their 2013 session.  As everyone understood, we are still unpacking all the unpleasant surprises within the bill that nobody read.  The latest victim is the state's warehousing industry.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports today that "Warehousing firms cry foul over new Minnesota taxes,"

"Most Minnesota businesses dodged a sweeping expansion of the sales tax, but not logistics firms.  The final version of the tax bill, approved moments before the end of the legislative session last week, included an expansion of the sales tax on a handful of unlucky industries. One of them is warehousing and storage."

It seems that Minnesota had not previously taxed warehouse services, nor has any other state.  The reaction of the state’s warehouse industry is to consider decamping to less hostile locales, such as Des Moines and Kansas City.

Reaching the Low Information Voter, Part 2

In the first part of this series, I explore Minnesota’s current political landscape and suggest some messages crafted to reach democracy’s newest key demographic: low information voters.  In this part, I dig deeper into what low information voters actually know, and how to approach them.

Escaping Portlandia

For those of you determined to turn the Twin Cities Metro into a midwestern version of Portland, Oregon, I urge you to read Jennifer Wyatt's account of her impending move from Portland to...(gasp)...Missouri.  Jennifer is chronicling her geographic and psychic journey at her blog I Say Missourah.  From her New Geography piece,

"Ten years ago I would have characterized Portland as a place that had progressive perspectives.  Now I would characterize Portland as a place with few ideas, all perpetually reinforced and more deeply ingrained every day.  People regurgitate a handful of versions of the same thoughts in ever narrowing expressions.  Everywhere you look it is repetition of the same ideas, whether it be on politics, design, or social culture.  People strive to look the same, to dress the same, and to have the same lifestyle...

"What began as a city with progressive and forward looking ideas to develop a new urban course has become a closed container of cultural conformity.  There is a new cookie cutter in Portland, and it is young, alterna-hip, and white."

Read the whole thing.

Radical Chic and Minnesota Media

On Memorial Day 2013, the Minneapolis Star Tribune honored a different kind of warrior (“New cause for ex-radical Sara Jane Olson”) on page A-7.  Billed as an Associated Press (AP) “Exclusive” and written by local AP political reporter Patrick Condon, the piece updates the reader on 1970s-era radical, convicted criminal, and St. Paul grandmother Sara Jane Olson.

Mr. Condon’s piece opens as follows,

Sara Jane Olson, the Minnesota woman who served seven years in prison for her involvement in high-profile 1970s radicalism, is edging back into public life…

Sorry, let me stop there.  She did not spend seven years in prison for radicalism, regardless of profile level or decade.  Radicalism, at least so far, is not against the law.  Ms. Olson served time in a California prison, not because she was a radical, but because she participated in violent criminal acts.  As Mr. Condon notes two paragraphs later,

Captured in 1999, Olson finally pleaded guilty to helping place pipe bombs under Los Angeles police cars and participating in a bank robbery near Sacramento in which a woman was killed.

Note the use of the passive voice in the final clause of that sentence.  Mistakes were made, a woman was killed.  Nobody, really, was responsible, you see.

Reaching the Low Information Voter, Part 1

With the 2013 legislative session now behind us, the 2014 election campaign can begin in earnest.  With major elections set for Governor, U.S. Senator, and the state House of Representatives, Minnesota’s voters have the opportunity to change the direction of the state’s politics for the third time in four years.

For the state’s Democrats, now enjoying one-party rule in St. Paul, the election is theirs to lose.  Thus the focus will inevitably fall on the Republicans’ response to the opportunity before them.   Already, there is no shortage of advice, coming from all points on the political compass.

Minnesota's Legislature Elects a New People

The Minnesota State Legislature ended its 2013 session with a hurried whimper, minutes before midnight on Monday, May 20^th. 

One of the last orders of business—the nearly 400-page tax bill—turns out to have been one of those “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it” situations.  The next-day headlines focused on the $2.1 billion in tax increases:  income tax hikes, corporate tax hikes, tobacco tax increases, sales tax increases, etc.  Not included in that figure are the $ hundreds of millions hidden as “fees” in the dozen or so spending bills that fund state government.

Now that the tax bill has passed, the sordid details are starting to trickle out.  Since Monday we have learned about $250 million in tax breaks for the Mall of America expansion, a $33 million bailout of the Minneapolis Central Library, and taxpayer money for a 3M corporate expansion in Maplewood.  The $400 million in subsidies for the Mayo Clinic in Rochester and a $33 million bailout of St. Paul’s Xcel Energy hockey arena were already known before the bill was voted on.  We are preemptively bailing out the new Vikings stadium, on which construction has yet to start.  I’m confident we will learn about more big-dollar taxpayer gifts over the next few weeks.

The Lobby Machine, What’s Wrong With Minnesota, Part 3

In this Part 3 of the behind-the-scenes series on what’s wrong with Minnesota government, we turn our attention to the role of lobbying at the state legislature.  I began this series by posting the question of “What’s wrong with Minnesota government?” and answering it with “private benefits, public costs.”

By “private,” I don’t always mean “corporate.”  By “corporate,” I don’t always mean “for-profit.”

For those readers who have never met one, I am sure that the word “lobbyist” conjures up an image of a Gucci-loafer-clad, $3,000-suit-wearing political fixer, roaming the halls of the capital.

Many want to place blame on individual lobbyists, or the profession in general, for what ails our democracy.  No bogeymen here, I’m afraid.  Like every other profession—law, medicine, engineering, etc.—the problem is not with the profession or its practitioners, but to the ends that they are employed.

Why Not Reform? What’s Wrong With Minnesota, Part 2

The Chamber of Commerce-led group United for Jobs Minnesota ran a series of TV ads this spring against the tax-and-spending ways of our Democrat-led state legislature.

The first ad, “We Can Do Better,” suggests that

“Government needs to spend more efficiently.  The politicians should do their jobs: go line by line and cut the waste.  That’s the responsible approach.”

I imagine that if Gallup or Rasmussen were to poll that idea among Minnesota voters it would garner majority support, among both Republicans and Democrats alike.  Everyone wants and expects value for the money they contribute to state government.

The TV ad is correct, that should be the job of politicians.  Unfortunately, the systems and processes that we have set up to create budgets and spend money at the state level make doing that job all but impossible.

It’s All in the Game

Many a tear has to fall
But it's all in the game

Those are the opening lyrics to the 1950’s pop standard “It's All in the Game.”  This sentimental love song has been covered by every artist from Nat King Cole to Van Morrison.  It also holds the curious distinction of being the only No. 1 hit to have been co-written by a Vice President of the United States (Charles Dawes).

More recently, the phrase (rendered as “It’s all in the game, yo”) was popularized by a character on the HBO drama The Wire.

The hipper members of Minnesota’s political press corps like to add the Twitter hashtag #allinthegameyo as they share their experiences on the Capitol beat.  I understand the anthropological reasons behind this behavior.  It signals both the writer’s cleverness and his/her prominent place within the political-insider hierarchy.

In the past week, I’ve been watching more live coverage of the Minnesota House and Senate proceedings than can be considered healthy.  As the end-of-session silliness unfolds, we have the usual bitter fights over obscure procedural rules.  However, I’ve noticed a disturbing trend in these rules disputes.

In the past few days, I’ve seen one fight in the Senate invoking a rule to shut the doors to the chamber, a second involving voting procedures and another dispute in the House over amendments to bills that change dates.  All of which sounds so hopelessly arcane.

The Senate door dispute at least involved the comic relief of majority-Democrat senators literally sputtering with rage at having senate rules—that they imposed—being turned against them.  The two other disputes involved the Democrat majority ruling one way on a Republican motion but ruling the opposite when a Democrat made the exact same motion from the floor.

The common theme is the arbitrary application of rules by the majority against the political minority.  The “doors” episode, in particular, illustrated the assumption among Democrats that rules exist for the sole purpose of keeping Republicans in line.  That the minority actually expected Democrats to abide by their own rules was taken as a personal insult by affected members of the ruling party.

And that same attitude is at the heart of the recent national IRS scandal.  As the details emerge of the IRS’ treatment of conservative non-profit groups, it merely serves to reinforce what so many already suspected: the system (government) is systemically biased against those on the right of the political spectrum.  This week, columnist Peggy Noonan wrote in the Wall Street Journal about the IRS scandal,

It's not part of the game.  This is not about the usual partisan slugfest.  This is about the integrity of our system of government and our ability to trust, which is to say our ability to function.

And so it goes.  Every arbitrary ruling from the Speaker’s Chair, every time a Senator votes her own financial interest, every payoff to a campaign contributor, every broken election-year promise chips away at the public’s trust in the entire enterprise.

That our hard-bitten, speaking-truth-to-power, seen-it-all local media can turn it into a cynical punch line speaks to how complicit they are in the corruption of the public trust.  Maybe it’s just me, but I stopped laughing some time ago.

Sen. Franken and Political Charity, Part 2

Earlier this week, I highlighted the hypocrisy of Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) in decrying both the political nature of some 501(c)(4) organizations and the biased investigations at the heart of the current IRS scandal.

It gets worse.  The Daily Caller pointed out how Sen. Franken called for the very investigations he now condemns.  The Daily Caller reports that Franken said in 2012,

“I think that there hasn’t been enforcement by the FEC and the IRS, and so there are entities that are taking a 501(c)4 status, and under that they’re supposed to have more than half of their activity be non-political,” Franken said.  “That’s pretty hinky. I mean, they really aren’t doing that, and that I think there needs to be a look at that—that even under the laws that already exist, there are people who should be disclosing who aren’t.  And I think that is where we’re seeing the effect of—lack of effective enforcement and just oversight.”

The Minneapolis Star Tribune website reports that Franken signed a letter in February 2012 with other Democrat Senators asking the IRS to investigate 501(c)(4) organizations.  It looks like Franken and the other democrats got exactly what they asked for: a partisan witch hunt during an election year.

It Lives! The Zombie Energy Bill

Last night (or was it this morning?) during the debate in the Minnesota State Senate on forced unionization of child care providers, the adjective "zombie" was thrown out to describe the bill's remarkable ability to keep rising from the dead.

Likewise, the solar power mandate bill keeps coming back, despite all efforts to bury it.  Last night, like a remora, it attached itself to the presumably more popular "jobs" bill (House File 729) and is said to be headed for the House floor tonight (Wednesday).

Sadly, the remnants of the [Sen. John] Marty Manifesto are still there, calling for an end to fossil fuel use and 100 percent renewable energy, "within the next few decades."  The blather about "the economic losses to the Minnesota economy from importation of fossil fuels" and "the economic and environmental costs of continued reliance on fossil fuels" remains.

As part of my day job, today, I attended a speech by Scott Tinker, the state geologist of Texas and a professor at the University of Texas.  Dr. Tinker, as part of an excellent presentation, made the important point that everything that was conventional wisdom regarding energy a decade ago turned out to be wrong.

The world produces more oil today than at any time in its history.  America is poised to resume its historic role as a net oil exporter, after decades as the world's largest oil importer.  America produces more natural gas than at any point in its history, and is poised to start a massive natural gas export business.

As Dr. Tinker demonstrated--even as we develop renewable energy and more nuclear power--American and world production of oil and natural gas will continue rising for the next few decades.  We will not run out of either oil or natural gas within the lifetime of any person now living.

Sen. Marty's bill reflects a worldview based on data no longer valid (if it ever was).  Turning away from fossil fuels--if we were actually to do so--would only harm our state.

Updated: Solar Power in the Dark of Night

[Updated:  I wrote too soon.  Despite media reports that a deal was done and the report signed, the conference committee is scheduled to reconvene and continue deliberations on the solar power bill.]

As clichéd as you can get in these matters, the Minnesota state legislature’s conference committee met in the dark of last night, behind closed doors, and hammered out a “compromise” on imposing a solar power mandate on four of the state’s electric utilities.

Local media, of course, portray the bill as watered-down, from the original demand of 10 percent solar, to a mere 1.5 percent.  The timeline has been moved up a few years, which means that the 18,000 workers who will lose their jobs as a result of the mandate will see their pink slips just that much sooner.

[Sorry, solar mandates don’t create “green” jobs, higher electricity prices will reduce employment across the economy.]

Gone from the bill is the increase in renewable energy requirements from 25 percent to 40 percent.  A ten percent solar “goal” remains.  Still in the bill are big favors for well-connected solar power companies.  Also included are generous payments to non-profits who can use the money to lobby for more expensive energy subsidies.

Most disturbingly, the bill would “make Minnesota the first state in the nation to use only renewable energy.”  Yes, the bill would write into state law a requirement for Minnesota to stop “burning fossil fuels.”  The government study on how the state will implement this goal is due January 14, 2014.

I know that many dismiss such pie in the sky as merely a “goal.”  But all it will take is an activist judge or an ambitious cabinet officer, and we will all be sitting in the dark.

Sen. Franken and Political Charity, Part 1

The Star Tribune's Hot Dish political blog quotes U.S. Senator Al Franken (D-MN) with this howler today on the subject of non-profit political groups,

“These 501(c)(4)’s [non-profits], in order to be tax-exempt, in order for people to give them money and also not be disclosed who they are, the 501(c)(4) has to spend at least 50 percent, plus a dollar, on actual social welfare.

"So, some of these organizations have been, you know, it looks like they have been spending more on just pure politics.  So it’s a legitimate inquiry by the IRS.  What is in no way legitimate is that this be biased in any way.  And the people responsible for this should be held accountable.”

The good Senator must have been much less concerned back in November 2010, when, as MinnPost reported, "Sens. Klobuchar, Franken headlining TakeAction dinner."  Franken had not problem headlining a big event for the controversial 501(c)(4) political charity.  Would he do it again?

O Tempora, O Mores!

Legislating Away Fossil Fuels

Not long after the 2012 election, in which Minnesota’s Democrats secured one-party rule in state government, leading environmental organizations—instrumental in the Democrats’ success—declared 2013 to be the year of solar power.  Specifically, the environmentalists call for the state’s utilities to produce 10 percent of their electricity from expensive solar power.

Earlier this week, the Minnesota House of Representatives did its part, setting a goal of 10 percent solar power, setting a mandate of 4 percent solar, and placing both on top of a renewable energy mandate raised from 25 percent to 40 percent.

Up next comes the state Senate, which is expected to take up its version of the bill later this week.  The Senate’s version is portrayed as less aggressive.  True, it is missing the 40 percent provision for the “wind” standard, omits the 10 percent solar “goal,” and has the solar mandate topping out at a mere one (1) percent.

Also dropped from the current Senate version was its previous Article 1, a long, rambling diatribe that read more like a newspaper editorial than it did serious law.  I’ve heard the old Article 1 described as “Marty’s Manifesto” after the bill’s chief author, Sen. John Marty (DFL-Roseville).  If it read like an Op-Ed commentary, it’s because it was this commentary, appearing in the left-leaning news website MinnPost.

The current Article 1 is not much of an improvement, as it calls for Minnesota to be “the first state in the nation to use only renewable energy.”  A 100 percent renewable energy standard may be Sen. Marty’s vision, but I doubt that a majority of Minnesota’s voters (or even its legislators) support that goal.  Nonetheless, a 100 percent renewable energy standard is now only a few steps from state law.

How would Sen. Marty accomplish his dream?  As it turns out, central planning.  State agencies would collaborate on

a framework for the state of Minnesota to transition to a renewable energy economy that ends Minnesota's contribution to greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels within the next few decades.

In developing his framework, Sen. Marty would have state agencies consult with a range of stakeholders—with the notable omission of anyone having anything to do with paying for his pipe dream.  Ratepayers are to be excluded from giving input into this grand “transition framework.”

Utopia by decree is almost at hand.  All it will take is the agreement of 34 state senators.

Liberalism Explained in One Paragraph

UK blogger Russell Taylor wrote this piece to explain current British politics.  However, this paragraph explains the liberal mindset the world over,

"[C]ontinuous economic growth was taken for granted.  Once you’ve been hoodwinked into believing that prosperity and social order are facts of nature or the product of enlightened government, conservative values don’t make much sense, they just appear mean and petty.  Politics becomes about lowering the criteria of success and removing the obstacles that stand between people and their rightful share of life’s bounty–things like objective values and codes of behaviour."

Be Very, Very Quiet, We’re Making Energy Policy

The Minnesota House of Representatives made history last night, passing a nation-leading 40 percent renewable electricity requirement (tied with Hawaii).  Added on top is a 10 percent solar-power-only goal, including a 4 percent solar mandate.  All told, Minnesota is requiring its biggest utilities to produce fully half of their power from renewable sources.

You didn’t hear about it?  Don’t worry, you weren’t supposed to.  The debate ran for hours, but was blacked out on public television.  Taxpayer funded radio is all but silent.

Time was, a big new renewable power requirement would make national news.  Last night, I was predicting that the House vote would get no more than a paragraph in our state’s leading newspaper.  I overestimated its newsworthiness.  Not one word of the vote appeared in today’s Minneapolis Star Tribune paper edition.

The Post-Modern Prude

As writer Victor Davis Hanson points out in this column, our elites sure have funny ideas about what is and isn't acceptable behavior.

Churchill Quote of the Day

Churchill wrote this about British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin, but it applies much more widely,

"Occasionally he stumbled over the truth, but hastily picked himself up and hurried on as if nothing had happened."

Minnesota Department of Wishful Thinking

This morning (May 2^nd) I attended an event held in the southeast metro at a conference center with floor-to-ceiling windows on three sides.  After last night’s freak, early-May snowstorm, the windows offered an excellent, 270° view of the several inches of climate change blanketing the Minnesota countryside.

In the midst of a sea of white, one speaker gamely tried to make the case for global warming. 

About 20 miles north, a subcommittee of the Minnesota State Senate was passing a bill to eliminate the use of fossil fuels within Minnesota’s borders.  Not reduce, eliminate.  I’m not kidding.

The Ungrateful Peasants

About a month ago, I praised Minnesota Democrat Governor Mark Dayton for holding town hall meetings around the state.  Perhaps I was too hasty.

Lately, Gov. Dayton’s encounters with the hoi polloi have not gone well.  On Monday, the Governor held one of his “Meetings With Mark” in the southwest metro suburb of Shakopee.  At the event, the Governor declared of his audience, “Never seen a group this rude.”

By Tuesday morning, he had doubled down, adding the word “juvenile” to his description of the crowd.  There seems to be a genuine disagreement among those actually on the scene regarding just how rude, if at all, the crowd was on Monday night.

There can be no mistake about the Governor’s demeanor when in front of a “hostile crowd.”  Although I was not on hand Monday night in Shakopee, I did attend what had to have been one of Governor Dayton’s first speeches after taking office back in 2011, a January 2011 appearance before the state Chamber of Commerce.  As this account of the event implies, when faced with a skeptical crowd, the Governor reverts to full lecture mode.  At least that’s the way it seemed to me from the cheap seats.