Desperate to Say Something...

As a new feature to my blog, I plan on posting the wacky and ridiculous comments uttered by elected officials and other public figures. In an attempt at fairness if the statement is actually (politically) arguable, from either side, it will not be posted. If however, the statement is so far removed in scope from any practical sense of reality it will be posted. Fair? I thought so.

First up, Senator Harry Reid's comments about the current opposition to the Health Care debate as somehow akin to opposition of the civil rights movement. Really, Senator Reid? Really?

GOP hits Reid on slavery comments - TheHill.com

GOP hits Reid on slavery comments - TheHill.com

My Predictions for MN's Budget

Predictions: My guess is the deficit will be $1.6 billion, corporate, personal, and consumption as the worst revenue areas. I support Pawlenty. I think the unallotments will prove legal. Once they do I expect an hard attempt to change this executive power at the legislature which I am fine with the legislature discussing. At that point, I call on everyone who believes he exceeded his authority to step up and admit they were wrong.

Build It Without Taxpayers Dollars

I'm all for it if it can be done by private investors, the NFL, businesses, or individual shares ala Green Bay or some combination thereof. But 'just say no' needs to be the answer to more tax payer burden for a stadium. Sorry, but when our own interests and desires get in the way of our principles, we have to be honest with ourselves.

The new session is coming up on February 4th, I hope the allure of a star-studded winning season will not cloud the judgment of the few common sense players remaining in the legislature.

Options:
1) Z. Wilf opens his checkbook and builds a new stadium
2) Some form of public ownership

Not an option:
1) Any un-related tax dollars dedicated to subsidizing large private businesses (i.e. don't charge me sales tax on a vacuum to pay for the Vikings Stadium, that just plan sucks!)

What about?

The economic boom to the community by keeping the Vikings here, construction jobs, the positives on community economic development? Yes, but at what cost? Will the those dollars ever be recaptured in increased economic activity? If you can prove to me it will than, I'll go for it.

Being true?

Yes, being true to ourselves. We can't go around talking about the evils of increasing taxes all the time, if when push comes to shove on a new Vikings Stadium, our go-to position is to raise taxes immediately 'just to keep the team here.' If that's your refrain than you might as well be one of those tax raising levy supporters that says, "it's for the kids," please...give me a break!

Coon Rapids: Down payment Assistance Program Passes

Coon Rapids: Down payment Assistance Program Passes

The Coon Rapids City Council voted unanimously to approve a Coon Rapids Mortgage Assistance Foundation recommendation for a new down payment assistance loan program.

Hats off to Coon Rapids Mortgage Assistance Foundation Board of Directors: Lyle Haney, Donna Naeve, Brad Crandall, Scott Schulte, Lonni McCauley, Tim Howe, and our own James Stanton, Shamrock Development and current President of North Metro REALTORS® Association. This program will rehabilitate housing stock and provide incentives for homebuyers to purchase and occupy a home in Coon Rapids as their principal residence.

So what are the details? Coon Rapids Mortgage Assistance Foundation (CRMAF) has allocated a total pool of $300,000 to be available for down payment assistance loans. The funds will be administered directly by Cheryl Bennett, CRMAF staff. The funds are provided in the form of a second mortgage. No payments are required; no interest is assessed unless the loan is repaid within the first three years after closing. The repayment is prorated between years 4-10 and is forgiven after 10 years. Loans are reserved for down payment assistance only at 3.5% of acquisition costs up to $6,000. Funds must be used in conjunction with an FHA 203K mortgage to purchase a single family detached property (within the city of Coon Rapids) with at least $10,000 in repairs. Rehab or renovation work must be completed by a state licensed contractor and work completed within six months of closing. The borrower must occupy the property as their principal homesteaded residence. There are no income requirements. Buyers need not be first time homebuyers. The loan is available for all properties and not foreclosures only.

REALTORS® are encouraged to learn more about this program and utilize it. More information including public announcements, public forums, and a REALTORS® forum to roll out program details are forthcoming.

More information contact, Eric J Myers, Government Affairs Director, NMRA

Conservatives Can't Win without Moderates

Well, after reviewing some of the 2009 wins. What do I think about the chance of Republicans picking up seats in 2010 Midterms? Or better yet, what is one piece of advice I would give to the RNC, if given the chance, that would help them increase their chance of success in more races in the future.

• BE MORE BIG TENT,

• EXPAND THE BASE,

• DON'T LET ONLY THE NARROWEST VERSIONS OF CONSERVATISM BE THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE ANSWER

Republican's can't continue to be a narrow 'Conservatives-only party.' They need to hold tight to fiscal conservatism but grab the middle of the electorate with the moderates. Unfortunately, the diehards that show up for endorsing conventions, prompted by Glen Beck and Rush (whom I enjoy as well), can't see the wood for the trees. They continue to endorse only the most ideologically extreme candidate whom too often ends up being seen as too far from the mainstream. Bottomline, Conservative Republicans are their own worst enemy. Conservative Republicans are going to have to realize that in most districts they are going to have to embrace the moderate candidate in order to give them a chance at success. Otherwise, they will continue to be marginalized from the Left and a larger majority of the middle will favor the D's.

Those are the risks.

Might I suggest that someone like Senator Olympia Snowe actually has a point to make with Conservative Republicans. So next time you want to win a 'leans conservative,' 'toss-up,' or even a 'leans Democrat' district, try pulling a candidate from the moderate part of your party and see if you can sell them to the general public as the most reasonable, likable, centrist, and dare I say it mainstream candidate in the race.

Or you can keep 'sticking to your principles' that's all well and good but I submit you aren't really winning the hearts and minds of too many people too often. At least not often enough to keep reversing your losses.

Give up on the idea that a Newt Gingrich or Ronald Regan style body politic will ever rise again. Step up to re-design the future of the party, reinvent yourself, and behold the power of political innovation. It's not just for the Democrats anymore.

Thank You Governor Tim Pawlenty

Dear Governor Tim Pawlenty,

I want to thank you for your personal leadership in resolving the budget deficit. DFL leaders proposed $2B in tax increases in the worst recession since the Great Depression. I really don't know how they can look at themselves in the mirror everyday. It takes courage to stand up to 'tax and spend' liberals in this great progressive state we call Minnesota.

It is truly my belief that you acted within your authority to unallot. That doens't mean the other side has to like it or that it should go without a legal challenge but those are issues for the legislature not the courts. My only hope now is that the courts don't legislate from the bench. Should the opposition wish to attempt to change MN law than they should do so in session.

Hopefully, Lori Swanson, Attorney General, for the State of Minnesota can divest herself enough from her party to actually defend the Chief Executive's Authority under Minnesota law. If not, I would advise the State of Minnesota to seek outside council.

Good luck Governor Pawlenty, we're with you!

My Suggestions for Health Care Compromise

(Here is what I believe a true compromise should look like)

KEEP

1) Guarantees Coverage for existing conditions
2) Prohibited from denying coverage because of a person's medical history
3) They will not be able to drop your coverage if you get sick
4) Focuses on prevention
5) Helps Seniors live independently

MAKE CERTAIN

1) No federal dollars for Abortion Services (per Obama)
2) Medical Mal Reform to keep Dr.'s practicing medicine not defensive medicine (per R's & Obama)

ADD

2) Allow buying insurance across state lines
3) Allow private insurance pooling for individuals who are otherwise uncovered
4) Allow for private health insurance portability
5) Encourage HSA's
6) Recognize and encourage high deductible catastrophic coverage for some insureds (i.e. young adults)
7.) Allow private insurance companies to pool the (47) million Americans without coverage and have them compete for that business

REMOVE
1) Drop the public option in its entirety
2) Drop basic medical insurance mandate or allow opt out for some individuals and or #6/#7 above.

Finally pass this bill by October 1st or set it aside and re-focus on job creation and the economy!

Cash For Clunkers--Cash Out, Now What?

Cash for Clunkers program ended yesterday at 8p.m. EDT. Dealerships have until 12 noon today for finalize all paperwork inputs into a government website for claims repayment.

While it certainly was a novel idea (depending on you POV)to get gas guzzlers off the road, promote a more carbon friendly trend, and feed those starving car salesman, it is lacking in a few areas.

Scope: With only $3 billion in rebate funds available there was always going to be a limit to the impact the program could provide. Estimates are that 456,000 cars were traded and sold. However, that's 456,000 out an estimated 136 million gas guzzlers still on the road today. I am no math wiz but my windows based calculator says that's just more than 1/3rd of one percent.

Temporary: There seems to be a phenomena in sales and marketing that I have resigned myself to never understanding. The temporary nature of on-sale, incentives, and rebates. Some major companies have setup a system by which they move from sale to sale. They go by various names. Biggest sale of the year, biggest sale of the season, etc. What I don't understand from these companies is why they are incenting their customers to forgo a purchase today and 'wait for a sale.' Now I know the idea about 'making the sale an event' thereby cajoling even more than a customer would have spent and so on. However, I have also been in a store on a Friday night and the sale doesn't start until Saturday. I find myself asking. "You really don't want me to buy this now?" These same stores can't understand why a store like Wal-mart is raking in profits even in a rough economy. Well Wal-Mart operates on an everyday savings philosophy rather than a 'wait until I decide to have a sale' philosophy. Which do you think people are going to respond to in a tough economy. Additionally, when people's individual economic situation improves do you think they will flood back into your stores? Or go the fiscally prudent route and remind themselves of the valuable lessons espoused during the 'great recession.' Hint even the tv commercial about 'unused' minutes that ends 'these days we can't afford to be wasteful,' are reinforcing a mantra of frugality that will likley linger far into a recovery. Now how does all this fit into 'cash for clunkers?' Well C4C was extremely temporary. Yes, it sold 456,000 cars but all based on temporary incentives. Remove the incentives and all you have left is a sputtering economy, nearly 10% unemployment, and another two years of nearly zero sales in the auto industry. The only one buying a car in the next two years is someone who's car dies and 'has no other choice.' Of course, their is always the exception that proves the rule. Brett Favre is reported to have recently bought a new F250 after receiving his $12 million contract.

Artificial demand: The law of artificial demand is certainly in play for C4C. The government gave away $3,500-$4,500 in cash if you bought a new fuel efficient car right? Doing so prompted 456,000 sales. Think about it. That should scare the heck out of the auto industry. That's 456,000 sales otherwise 'would be sales' from 2-5 years from now. So slice these new car buyers out of your pool of 'would be buyers' from 2-5 years from now or longer. Moreover, if it takes $4,500 in free money from the government to prompt you to buy that's one otherwise purchase adverse buyer. Even further, think about those who need a new car were offered the same incentives and still decided not to purchase. That's an extremely purchase adverse buyer. Who can blame them, real or perceived this is one tough economy to be making medium term financial decisions. The problem with artificial demand is just that. It's artificial its not organic growth but is dependent on some outside variable like a temporary incentive and once removed it falls flat or worse.

Subsidy: Dare we wander into the throws of partisan bickering and a classic debate about tax policy, there is no dispute that the federal government funds expended for this program are from the taxpayers. So the only question left is how do you see it?

Potential View Point:

One may argue that the federal government has a role in regulating markets including interventions for ailing markets like the auto industry and thereby extending a rebate program to provide an extra boost is just what the doctor ordered, even if for just a little while.

Potential View Point:

Government should have no role or a very limited role in market forces. Trends and innovations should be based on responses to market demands. Taxpayer money should not be utilized to incentivize purchasing behavior in preference of one product over another.

Make Your Own View Point:

C4C was: 1) Extremely Successful 2) Successful 3) Below Expectaions 4) Extremely Wasteful

What should the Government Role be in Regulating Markets?

What is your personal tax policy?

Obama's Health Care Plan--What do I agree with?

The YEA and Nay on Health Care -- My Prospective

YEA
+ Guarantees Coverage for existing conditions
+ Prohibited from denying coverage because of a person's medical history
+ They will not be able to drop your coverage if you get sick
+ Focuses on prevention
+ Helps Seniors live independently

NAY
- Government Run
- Steps towards universal payer system
- Could lead to rationing care
- Government Involved in your health care decisions
- Focuses on covering everyone rather than Quality and Patient Results
- Costs savings are based on projections of savings from ER visits and more costly forms of health care delivery. It's very difficult to book those savings.
- Tends to usurp the private market
- Yes, fine I can keep my coverage if I "like it" but who's going to like it when the government plan prices the private market out of the market.
- Current world class health care could become second rate.
- There is a reason why people from all over the world come the U.S. for Health Care
- Health Care when delivered is excellent, it's the payment system we need to address. Let's incent insurers to achieve payment reform rather than create new mandates and re-invent the wheel by creating an entirely new government run plan.

The simply not true:
- Death Panels
- Elderly being put out to pasture

Health Care: Pawlenty In the Washington Post

DEAR READER: If you read this and can't agree with even some of it then you should question whether you have any ideas about health care at all that go beyond DNCC talking points. These things just make sense! Let's make the goal quality and pay for performance not just a 'cover everyone' government plan. -- Eric J. Myers


To Fix Health Care, Follow the States

By Tim Pawlenty
Monday, August 3, 2009

If you tie money to results, you'll get better results. Unfortunately, government often dumps money into programs without regard to accountability and outcomes. This past week, Democrats in Congress have been busy tinkering with a Washington takeover of the health-care system, but perhaps they should look instead to the states for models of market-driven, patient-centered and quality-focused reform. Rather than taking power away from states, federal health-care reform should use the lessons we've learned tackling this crisis in our back yards.

In Minnesota, our state employee health-care plan has demonstrated incredible results by linking outcomes to value. State employees in Minnesota can choose any clinic available to them in the health-care network they've selected. However, individuals who use more costly and less-efficient clinics are required to pay more out-of-pocket.

Not surprisingly, informed health-care consumers vote wisely with their feet and their wallets. Employees overwhelmingly selected providers who deliver higher quality and lower costs as a result of getting things right the first time. The payoff is straightforward: For two of the past five years, we've had zero percent premium increases in the state employee insurance plan.

Minnesota has also implemented an innovative program called QCARE, for Quality Care and Rewarding Excellence. QCARE identifies quality measures, sets aggressive outcome targets for providers, makes comparable measures transparent to the public and changes the payment system to reward quality rather than quantity. We must stop paying based on the number of procedures and start paying based on results.

Instead of returning power to patients and rewarding positive outcomes, many Democrats in Washington want a government-run plan that would require states to comply with dozens of new mandates and regulations. One study by the Lewin Group recently concluded that an estimated 114 million Americans could be displaced from their current coverage under such a plan, and another study by House Republicans said the plan could result in the loss of up to 5 million jobs over the next 10 years.

In typical fashion, the self-proclaimed experts piecing together this Democratic health-care legislation are focusing on only one leg -- access -- of a three-legged stool that also includes cost and quality. Expanding access to health care is a worthwhile goal. But equal or greater focus should be placed on containing costs for the vast majority of Americans who already have insurance. Those costs will not be contained by a massive expansion of federal programs.

Massachusetts's experience should caution Congress against focusing primarily on access. While the Massachusetts plan has reduced the number of uninsured people, costs have been dramatically higher than expected. The result? Increased taxes and fees. The Boston Globe has reported on a current short-term funding gap and the need to obtain a new federal bailout.

Imagine the scope of tax increases, or additional deficit spending, if that approach is utilized for the entire country.

Congress has an opportunity to take a genuinely bipartisan approach to health-care reform, which is unquestionably needed. Instead of tweaking the Democrats' plan to put Washington bureaucrats in charge of health care, I recommend a do-over. There are many common-sense elements that could form the basis for bipartisan health-care reform, including: medical malpractice reform, prohibiting coverage denials based on preexisting conditions, guaranteeing portability, electronic prescriptions and medical records, streamlining billing codes and practices, price and quality transparency, pay-for-performance measures, one-stop primary-care "medical homes," chronic disease management initiatives, tax equity for health insurance purchases, increased incentives for health savings accounts, creating the ability to purchase insurance or form risk pools across state lines, and much more.

As my friend Newt Gingrich said last month when he was at a health-care reform event in Minneapolis, Congress is considering a 1975 socialized medicine model, brought up 34 years later by people who have been in Congress since the early 1970s. The world has moved on. It's time for Democrats in Congress to catch up. Washington can and should do better. But they'll need to listen to and learn from our experience in the states to make it happen.

The writer, a Republican, is governor of Minnesota.

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Tinklenberg pulls out of 3-way race against Bachmann

DFLer Elwyn Tinklenberg abruptly withdraws from 6th District congressional race so party can focus on beating Rep. Michele Bachmann
Tinklenberg pulls out of 3-way race against Bachmann
By Bill Salisbury
bsalisbury@pioneerpress.com
Updated: 08/04/2009 11:59:01 PM CDT

Just eight days after announcing he would make a second run for the 6th District congressional seat, Democrat El Tinklenberg on Tuesday abruptly pulled the plug on his campaign, saying a prolonged fight for the Democratic-Farmer-Labor nomination would make it difficult to defeat Republican U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann in 2010.

Tinklenberg, a former Blaine mayor and state transportation commissioner, last year narrowly lost to Bachmann, 46 percent to 43 percent.

But he would have faced two strong contenders for the DFL nomination next year, Assistant Senate Majority Leader Tarryl Clark, of St. Cloud, and Dr. Maureen Reed, of Stillwater.

Tinklenberg said in a statement that he didn't want to devote the next 13 months to spending time and money "trying to defeat each other, rather than defeating Michele Bachmann. That is not a campaign I want to wage, nor is it the kind of campaign that strengthens our chance of electing a Democrat next fall," he said.

Clark declared her candidacy last Wednesday, while Reed, the Independence Party candidate for lieutenant governor in 2006, jumped into the race in May.

"This has never been about me," Tinklenberg said. "It's about restoring responsible, productive representation to the 6th District. It is my hope that by removing myself from the race, I am advancing our chances of achieving that goal."

His campaign manager, Dana Houle, said a DFL intraparty battle for the nomination appeared inevitable, and it would have
Advertisement
drained the resources needed to win in November 2010.

"To beat Michele Bachmann is going to take a lot of money, time and focus," he said.

Tinklenberg didn't see the situation changing in the next three to six months, "so it was better to do it now," Houle said.

Tinklenberg had raised $55,000 this year for what is likely to be a multimillion-dollar race. Reed, by contrast, had raised $232,000 by the end of June.

"Maureen Reed has done well, and I suspect that Tarryl will be able to easily raise money," said Bill McCarthy, president of the Minneapolis Regional Labor Federation and a DFL activist from Blaine. "So El was in a difficult spot."

Moreover, McCarthy, who backed Tinklenberg in 2008, said he had told the candidate that unlike last year, he would not get early labor support this time. He said most unions wouldn't endorse a candidate before the DFL convention next spring.

But Monday night, just hours before Tinklenberg's announcement, a large and politically active union, AFSCME Council 5, endorsed Clark. The union represents 43,000 public and nonprofit workers, including 5,000 members in the 6th District.

Other 2008 Tinklenberg supporters said he made the right decision.

"Tinklenberg had a great opportunity in 2008, and it didn't work out," said veteran DFL strategist Todd Rapp, of Woodbury. "A lot of DFL delegates and primary voters will be looking for a different, fresher candidate this time. The cards were stacked against him."

Clark concurred with Tinklenberg that a divisive DFL primary in September would make it difficult to wage a strong challenge to Bachmann in November.

"I agree with him that it's time to get unified and start making sure we are accomplishing the task in front of us," she said, noting that she has agreed to abide by the endorsement of the DFL convention next spring.

Reed has not agreed to abide by the endorsement. She issued a statement praising Tinklenberg but could not be reached for further comment.

Elk River Community Wide Open House

Sunday, August 16,; 1-4p.m.

See over (40) Open Houses in Elk River!

Go on a self-guided tour!

Time is running out on the $8,000 First Time Homebuyer Tax Credit. The credit expires November 30, 2009.

Don't wait, don't let low prices, low interest rates, and a great federal tax credit pass you by. Not to mention some homes in Elk River may be Neighborhood Stabilization Program eligible which could mean Down Payment Assistance to those who qualify.

More information at: http://www.northmetro.com/events/events-detail.php?intResourceID=5321

Coon Rapids Open Houses -- Sunday June 28, 1-4p

http://www.northmetro.com/events/events-detail.php?intResourceID=5268

Go on a self-guided tour of over (100) homes in Coon Rapids!

View the homes,

Explore the neighborhoods,

Assess community offerings (parks, local amenities, shopping)

Make a home for yourself (or someone you know) in Coon Rapids!

Pawlenty Will Not Seek Third Term

Dear Friends:

Today I announced that I will not seek a third term as Governor.

Please click here to watch the video.

Serving this great state has been the great honor of my life. I'm profoundly grateful for the opportunity to serve the wonderful people of Minnesota.

My administration has made a major, positive difference for Minnesota. We developed and deployed the best support programs for members of the military, their families and veterans in the country. We led the nation in developing a cleaner, more secure and more America-based energy future. We led the nation in education reform and results, have been nation-leading in redesigning and improving health care and much more.

And importantly, we imposed some much-needed discipline on government in this state by keeping a lid on taxes and spending. We even succeeded in achieving the long-standing goal of moving Minnesota out of the top ten states in taxes.

But, being Governor should not be a permanent position for someone.

With length of service in public office, a little less is always better than a little too much. It's a lesson I learned spending time in places like the Croatian Hall in South Saint Paul, where there is inevitably less joy and more trouble in too much pizza or too much beer. We don't have term limits in Minnesota, but we do have good judgment and common sense. We are a government of laws and ideas, not personalities.

Be assured, though, that I will make the most of the nineteen months left in the term Minnesotans have given me. I will continue to spend every day doing what's right for them. Minnesota will get my very best until I'm done. There is much important and difficult work remaining, and I will tackle it aggressively and finish strong.

The Scriptures say "there is a time for every purpose". For me, the purpose of the next nineteen months will be to do the very best I can for Minnesota.

Thank you for all your guidance and support over the years. I truly could not have done it without you.

Sincerely,

Tim Pawlenty
Governor


www.TimPawlenty.com | info@TimPawlenty.com | (651) 905-0555

We make our best efforts to ensure e-mails sent by us are welcome and sent only to appropriate addresses. If you are receiving this message in error, please click "unsubscribe" below to remove your address from our list.
Contributions or gifts to the Pawlenty for Governor Committee are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes. Minnesota law prohibits the solicitation of or acceptance of contributions from lobbyists, political committees, political funds, dissolving principle campaign committees or from party units during a legislative session. If you are a lobbyist, political committee, political fund, dissolving principle campaign committee, or a party unit, providing this information was not intentional and you are requested to disregard it.

Prepared and paid for by Pawlenty for Governor - PO Box 21887 - Eagan, MN 55121.

Click here to subscribe or unsubscribe.

Coon Rapids Open HouseS June 28, 2009 1-4p.m.

Agents Get Your Listings Registered!

NMRA, REALTORS® and the City of Coon Rapids are teaming up to help move housing inventory! The Community Opens initiative will help spur buying activity! We are encouraging all brokers and agents to hold their Coon Rapids real estate listings open all on the same day, allowing homebuyers to walk through a variety of homes!

•Listing Agents: Get your listings registered for showings and stop by NMRA to pick up your free custom Community Wide Open House sign.

•Buyers Agents: Promote Coon Rapids and take your buyers out to multiple homes.
Why Should You Participate?

•Agents will have access to lots of potential buyers, a.k.a. LEADS!!

•Your sellers will be excited about the extra marketing and possible increased traffic that this event will bring to their property.

•Agent will be assisting in promoting the community AND in moving the non-foreclosure and foreclosure inventory through the system - thus gaining positive publicity for their personal business, their company and Realtors in general.

Coon Rapids is OPEN!
Sunday, June 28, 2009
1:00-4:00pm

Please register your listings by filling out this form.

Click here to download a flyer for this event.

Inform your buyers of this event. Flyer for your buyers available here.


Thank you to Deesign Company for sponsoring the signs and sign riders!

Anti-Bullying Veto is Perfect Example of Wedge Issues

Pawlenty simply vetoed the bill because he didn’t want to give out new “special protected class” status. He is not pro-bullying. He simply doesn’t want to construct additional protected classes. There is an argument to be made that a special class protection undermines attempts to actually combat bullying. Schools already have anti-bullying policies.

If Safe Schools for All Coalition was truly interested in a meaningful and effective piece of anti-bullying legislation they would have left the politics (both sides) of “special protected classes” out of the equation.

Feel free to blame Pawlenty for pandering to the Right but make sure you ignore the construction of this type a legislation as a willful ‘wedge issue’ designed solely to attack and discredit.

Political End Game--High Stakes Poker

OPINION

(05/01/2009) Minnesota House and Senate Democrats lose bargaining chip points everyday between May 1, 2009 and May 18,2009 that they delay finalizing the Tax Bill Conference Committee report, passing both bodies, and an actual presentment to Governor Tim Pawlenty. My theory is they loose bargaining chip points because everyday that goes by will diminish the number of days remaining for true negotiation between the legislature and the Governor.

Quite honestly both the Minnesota House and Minnesota Senate moved quickly to pass Tax Bills that they knew would be largely unacceptable to the Governor. What is likely to emerge from conference committee will be a hybrid of the two bills which will still be--unacceptable!

Leaving very few days left for negotiation might be a risky strategy. Facing a certain veto and very little chance at a House Majority for override (never say never), the DFL is attempting to force the Governor into a corner faced with the choice between his political ambitions (approval rating), a timely end to session (not likely), and tax increases (Taxpayers League Pledge).

However, while the House and Senate DFL have no political downside to forcing a "extra innings," because they are not up for election this year, the Governor presumably does have some downsides to such an occurrence. Yet, the relationship is not completely 1:1. That is a Governor's action to defeat anything is a strong Chief Executive action and it only bolsters his case and his ability to step up on to a political soapbox no matter what the issues let alone tax increases on all Minnesotans!

Yet after May 18, 2009. Should a special session be called, every day that passes could be dangerous for the Governor. Nobody wants an extended session. Plus it will be easier to blame the Governor (one person) than the entire legislature (spread the blame around). So Pawlenty's approval rating could get a positive bump out a Tax Increase Veto but it will fade relatively quickly as quick end to special session cannot be reached. Remember people have became saturated (fed up) with the extend Norm Coleman v. Franken debacle and have no further appetite for further ineptitude from elected officials including an extended Special Session with no end in sight.

Of course, the Governor does not need to call a special session and the legislature itself does not have the authority to convene themselves. The Governor reserves the ability to use unallotment as he did in previous budget years and most recently during December 2008 to balance out the previous budget years. Being forced to dismantle state government agencies budgets by himself could damaging as well.

The DFL will not come unscathed either. Governor Pawlenty is a skilled political tactitioner and should he be forced to unallot he has total control over which agencies take the biggest whack. Two prime targets would be K-12 and HHS. Less likely to whack k-12, since he proposed 2% increases, he would likely go after HHS and would draw 'all the usual suspects' in their outrage and complaint (Sen. Berglin) and the HHS pro-entitlement program communities. However, this plays well to his conservative base, who already believe government is 'bloated' in this area.

Moreover, House and Senate Omnibus bills, 13 or so, have all set their funding to targets achieved only by filling $1.5 and $2 Billion gaps 'new revenue' gaps. So if they are not successful in securing that funding in the tax bill then all the other omnibus (program) bills will suffer.

Conclusion, the Minnesota House,Senate, and Governor are engaged in a high stakes game of poker where political showmanship, political will, scoring points with the electorate is just as much a goal as balancing the budget.

My prediction. No side will come out unscathed and odds at State Level Tax increases are at less than 25% likely. Sin taxes are running well above average and non-tax revenue (fees), where available, whoa...look out!

Complete Lack of Respect

The Obama Administration, the F.A.A., Gibbs, anyone who knew about the flight owes approximately 20 million people an apology.

Can anyone fathom that not one single person involved in or who had knowledge of the "joy ride" around New York City had even an inkling that it might not be such a good idea. I am all for following orders but someone should have questioned it and the answer should have been 'are you frickin' kidding me?'

All I can say, is whoever authorized and or had knowledge of the flight is guilty of a complete lack of respect if not more!

Minnesota Senate Passes Income Tax Increase

Minnesota Senate Passes Income Tax Increase
How Did Your Senator Vote?

(April 24, 2009) St. Paul--The Minnesota Senate passed a bill on that would, among a myriad of other tax changes, increase all state income tax brackets, although somewhat temporarily. The new rates are for tax years 2009 through 2013, with a return to current rates in the expiration year. The current rates are changed as follows:

Current/New Tax Rate Income
5.35% to 6.00% $0- $31,860
7.05% to 7.70% $31,860 - $126,580
7.85% to 8.50% $126,580 -$250,000

New fourth tier rate is 9.25 percent
o $250,000 for married individuals filing joint returns
o $212,500 for unmarried individuals qualifying as head of household
o $141,250 for unmarried individuals
o $125,000 for married filing separately

These income tax increase do expire beginning after a February forecast with a positive general fund balance projection for that year that exceeds or equals the projected amount of tax revenue produced by the increased tax rates. Who really knows when that will be? The bill is now headed to conference committee where the House and Senate will negotiate a final tax bill; both have to vote to re-pass it before it can be presented to the Governor.
Note: Astute political observers will note the DFL Caucus did intentionally attempt to protect some suburban/vulnerable/swing district DFL members by letting them vote against the taxes increases.

The roll was called, and there were yeas 35 and nays 31, as follows:
Those who voted in the affirmative were:
Anderson –St. Paul (DFL)
Bakk –Cook (DFL)
Berglin—Mpls.(DFL)
Betzold—Fridley (DFL)
Chaudhary—Fridley (DFL)
Clark—St. Cloud (DFL)
Cohen—St. Paul (DFL)
Dibble—Mpls (DFL)
Foley—Coon Rapids (DFL)
Higgins—Mpls. (DFL)
Johnson—Ham Lake (R)
Kelash—Mpls. (DFL)
Kubly—Granite Falls (DFL)
Langseth—Glyndon (DFL)
Latz—St. Louis Park (DFL)
Lourey—Kerrick (DFL)
Marty—Roseville (DFL)
Metzen—South St. Paul (DFL)
Moua—St. Paul (DFL)
Murphy—Red Wing (DFL)
Pappas—St. Paul (DFL)
Pogemiller—Mpls (DFL)
Prettner Solon—Duluth (DFL)
Rest—New Hope (DFL)
Saxhaug—Grand Rapids (DFL)
Scheid—Brooklyn P. (DFL)
Sheran—Mankato (DFL)
Sieben—Newport (DFL)
Skoe—Clearbrook (DFL)
Sparks—Austin (DFL)
Stumpf –Plummer (DFL)
Tomassoni—Chisholm (DFL)
Torres Ray—Mpls. (DFL)
Vickerman—Tracy (DFL)
Wiger—Maplewood (DFL)
Those who voted in the negative were:
Carlson—Eagan (DFL)
Dahle—Northfield (DFL)
Day—Owatonna (R)
Dille—Dassel (R)
Doll—Burnsville (DFL)
Erickson Ropes—Winona (DFL)
Fischbach—Paynesville (R)
Fobbe—Zimmerman (DFL)
Frederickson—New Ulm (R)
Gerlach—Apple Valley (R)
Gimse—Willmar (R)
Hann—Eden Prairie (R)
Ingebrigtsen—Alexandria (R)
Jungbauer-- East Bethel (R)
Koch—Buffalo (R)
Koering—Fort Ripley (R)
Limmer—Maple Grove (R)
Lynch—Rochester (DFL)
Michel—Edina (R)
Olseen—Harris (DFL)
Olson, G. –Minnetrista (R)
Olson, M.—Bemidji (DFL)
Ortman—Chanhassen (R)
Pariseau—Farmington (R)
Robling—Jordan (R)
Rosen—Fairmont (R)
Rummel—White Bear Lake (DFL)
Saltzman—Woodbury (DFL)
Senjem—Rochester (R)
Skogen—Hewitt (DFL)
Vandeveer—Forest Lake (R)

House Tax Bill Blasts Homeowners Narrowly Passes
How Did Your Representative Vote?
(April 25, 2009) St. Paul--One day after the Minnesota Senate voted to raise income taxes on all Minnesotan’s, the Minnesota House Tax bill that increases income tax on top income earners to 9 percent, eliminates the mortgage interest deduction (replacing with a credit worth half as much), removes the deductibility of property taxes, eliminates the relative homestead market value credit (MVC), increases cigarette taxes by 54 cents, increases drink taxes by 3 to 5 cents, and caps the child care tax credit at $200, narrowly passed the House Floor.
Again, Democrat Farmer Labor caucus leaders allowed (18) suburban, vulnerable, or swing district legislators to vote against the tax increases but insured they had just enough votes to pass the bill. Headed to conference committee REALTORS® and the general public are urged to pay extra special attention to the process, negotiations, and resulting language changes from here on out. Of course, whatever comes out of conference committee will likely still have a number of provisions the Governor still finds unreasonable. Suffice to say legislators and the Governor still have their work cut out for them. While one can only speculate as to the intricacies of the final package, glimpses at what is to come for the end game have certainly started to emerge.
Note: Bold below are ‘crossover DFLers’ (DFLers who voted no).
Who Represents You?
How Did Your Representative Vote?
Those who voted in the affirmative were:
Anzelc
Atkins
Bigham
Bly
Brown
Brynaert
Carlson
Champion
Clark
Davnie
Dill
Eken
Falk
Faust
Fritz
Greiling
Hansen
Hausman
Haws
Hayden
Hilstrom
Hilty
Hornstein
Hortman
Hosch
Huntley
Johnson
Juhnke
Kahn
Kalin
Kelliher
Knuth
Koenen
Laine
Lenczewski
Liebling
Lieder
Lillie
Loeffler
Mahoney
Mariani
Marquart
Morrow
Mullery
Murphy, E.
Murphy, M.
Nelson
Newton
Norton
Olin
Paymar
Persell
Peterson
Reinert
Rukavina
Sailer
Sertich
Simon
Slawik
Slocum
Solberg
Thao
Thissen
Tillberry
Wagenius
Ward
Welti
Winkler
Those who voted in the negative were:
Abeler
Anderson, B.
Anderson, P.
Anderson, S.
Beard
Benson
Brod
Buesgens
Bunn
Cornish
Davids
Dean
Demmer
Dettmer
Dittrich
Doepke
Doty
Downey
Drazkowski
Eastlund
Emmer
Gardner
Garofalo
Gottwalt
Gunther
Hackbarth
Hamilton
Holberg
Hoppe
Howes
Jackson
Kath
Kelly
Kiffmeyer
Kohls
Lanning
Loon
Mack
Magnus
Masin
McFarlane
McNamara
Morgan
Murdock
Nornes
Obermueller
Otremba
Pelowski
Peppin
Poppe
Rosenthal
Ruud
Sanders
Scalze
Scott
Seifert
Severson
Shimanski
Smith
Sterner
Swails
Torkelson
Urdahl
Westrom
Zellers

Senate Tax Plan = Tax Everyone!

The Minnesota Senate Tax plan is even worse than one might imagine. It plans to raise $2.2 Billion in taxes. Mostly, by raising income taxes on everyone! That's right...everyone!

Income Current Rate Proposed Rate

0- 31,860 5.35 6.0

31,860 - 126,580 7.05 7.7

126,580 - 250,000 7.85 8.5

Creating a new 4th tier

141,250 Single
212,500 Head of Household
250,000 Jointly

would all pay 9.25% amongst the highest income tax rate in the country! Only California and Rhode Island have higher income taxes on the wealthy. Even if we, for the sake of argument, don't even consider the evils of a proposed tax increase on the wealthy, this plan is extends to every taxpayer! Everyone who pays taxes will pay more. Where does it end?

Now I know there are those out there that are going to make excuses for it and try to explain it away, usually by say "if it means better schools, roads, etc then I am all for it." That's fine to say once. It's just not reality. Reality is that Minnesota's GF sepnding has doubled in the last 10 years from 18 B to 38 B. I don't know business or individual who's budget doubles every ten years. So you say we can't do it with cuts alone and I say 'yes we can!'

MN House Floats Tax Raising Bill

The Minnesota House of Representatives finally revealed their expected prodigal Tax Bill. Having previously set there budget up to include $1.5 Billion in "New Revenues" (a.k.a. new taxes) the House Tax Chair is taking the opening shot at what will prove to be a very difficult legislative end game. Less than one month to go, the House plans to balance the state budget by creating a new 4th Tier Income Tax rate at 9% (read = class warfare), increasing the cigarette tax by 54 cents (admittedly the most regressive tax), increasing liquor tax by 5 cents per drink (read = weak), and last but certainly not least by eliminating the State Mortgage Interest Deduction and creating a credit instead. The Mortgage Interest Deduction is aggregious because it would disportionately fall on the newest buyers first and apply to their taxes for a period of approximately 10-15 years based on most mortgages being front end loaded.

Really House DFL? This is the plan we have been waiting for 4 months? Don't strain yourself. Don't put something into your strategy. Just serve up exactly the worst piece of garbage you can come up with and wait for the veto!

Six Step's to Handling Madoff's Assets?

Bernard Madoff's assets:

$7 million Manhattan Penthouse
$1 million Home in Cap d' Antibes, France
$3 million Luxury Home in Long Island
$10 million Furnishings
$62 million Securities
$2.4 million 55' Yacht & 24ft boat

How to handle his assets:

1) Step one certify everyone who has a legitimate claim.

2) Sell all REAL Estate at High End Auction, make sure to pay a REALTORS(R) commission

3) Sell all remaining securities

4) EBAY every piece of personal property

5) Create a trust to pay ALL claims

6) Deposit any proceeds into U.S. Treasury

U.S. Gov't to Guarantee your new car warranty??

Okay, now this is just the most 'whacked out' plan ever. The U.S. Government, the same entity that brought you: Auto Bailouts, Bank Bailouts, Stimulus, zero percent fed funds rate, rising unemployment, and a penchant for printing money faster than a nuclear particle accelerator. Now came up with the brillant idea of gauranteeing your new car warranty, if the auto industry goes out of business.

Yeah right, like anyone is buying a new car. I was at the dealer today and it was a fricking ghost town!

What does a gaurantee mean when the dollar falls below the peso?

Minnesota's February Forecast Released

If the last election has you more interested in politics than ever before.
If you read the newspaper and think, there has to be more information.
If you are concerned about Minnesota's economic future.

Than you really owe it to yourself to read or at least skim the Minnesota Management and Budget Office's February Forecast. It is a complete economic picture of Minnesota right now and a short prospectus for future quarters of economic activity.

Give it a look see!


http://www.mmb.state.mn.us/doc/fu/09/complete-feb09.pdf

AIG gets 4th Billion Dollar Government Handout!!

Well the U.S. Government must be reading "The Little Engine that Could" because it sure doesn't know when to give up.

The New York Times is reporting the U.S. Government is about to bailout AIG for the fourth, count them, one, two, three, four, fourth time.

Apparently, all the help offered thus far has not been nearly quite enough. Let's briefly review.

First time around, the U.S. Government gave AIG a $60 billion loan. That should do it right? I mean $60,000,000,000 'it ain't peanuts' am I right? Well no, not quite.

Second time around, the U.S. Government purchased $40 billion worth of preferred stock. Making the Government one of the largest share holders. Now that outta do it right? I mean $100 billion total, now we are talking real money. Nope not going to happen.

Third time around, the U.S. Government spends $50 billion to clean up AIG's so called Toxic Assets. BTW, Toxic Assets to you and me are called 'poor investment choices' or huge credit bills at high interest rates with no way to pay. The government as it's role of 'lender of last resort' is diehard against letting AIG fail. It would rather keep it on the Government roll.

Ok that's it I've fricken had it. We've given you $150 billion and you still can't make it? Does AIG strike anyone else like that gambling addicted uncle you remember from your childhood? You know who I am talking about. The one who when he showed up you hid your piggy bank to make sure you didn't lose your allowance to gambling addicted alcholic bum. Remember when he showed up to your birthday party and your gift was pre-played pull tabs and a pine tree air freshner? Remember asking yourself why your mother kept handing him money and making him dinner without so much as a thank you. All you kept thinking to yourself was how all you got was a mere $2.50 a week and had to do all your chores meanwhile your uncle could show up unannouced wreaking of booze, fresh off that gambling loss without a cent to his name and he would still manage to get $100-$200 out of your parents. But oh yeah, that's right 'it's a disease,' yeah sure. You sick alright. Sick of working for a living and following the rules like the rest of us smucks! Seriously, does AIG remind anyone else of their deadbeat uncle or is it just me?

Wait what's that? You need $30 billion more? "No problem, step right into my office Mr. AIG? We have that $30 billion right over hear. What worried about paying back the $150 billion you already own us, nonsense. What will the American people think? I wouldn't worry your pretty little head about those things. We'll just slip it into the business section of the NY Times on a Saturday after people have completely given up reading the paper and watching the news.

What does the U.S. Government say to defend it's position? "AIG is intricately woven through the words banking system." Therefore we must give them billions and take massive stakes in the company. News flash! If you would have let them fail to begin with then they wouldn't have been so "woven" would they?

After this transaction the U.S. Government will own 80% of AIG's holding company. That's right 80%!

In fact, if the Government would own any more of AIG, greater than 80%, than the U.S. Government would have to consolidate AIG's and US finances onto one balance sheet leaving the U.S. Government responsible to nearly 76 million insurance policy holders from around the world!

Soon enough AIG and USA will be synonymous and interchangeable.

I think AIG stands for 'Already in Government's pocket' and USA stands for "U Screwed us All!"

Minnesota Legislature Rule and Policy Changes

Recently, the Minnesota legislature made some rule or policy changes effecting the way it operates. Here are those changes. I placed them into three categories reflecting my opinions on each one and have commented in italics but all of these have been implemented.

I agree this is a good change
•The names and jurisdiction of House and Senate committees should be more closely aligned, including the accounts assigned to budget divisions.
•House and Senate committees should cooperate more, by establishing more joint House/Senate committees, or by having more joint committee meetings. The Pension Commission is a good example. Having joint committees or joint hearings would be particularly useful for finance committees.
•Each House member should serve on fewer committees, which should be accomplished by reducing the number of committees and by reducing the number of members serving on each committee. Too many members are too busy with committees and there is little time for constituent work or time to study the issues.

•The jurisdiction of each House committee and division should be described in detail (including the chapters of Minnesota Statutes within the jurisdiction of each group) and this information should be available on the House website. This is already done!
•Committees should give better notice of their agendas, including notice of major amendments to be considered.
•Committee chairs should attempt to give notice of the next week’s agenda by Thursday of the preceding week.

•Committee meetings should begin at the scheduled time. Gone should be the days of jokes about “legislative time.”

•Committees should be expected to do most of the work on bills. The House should use standing committees and subcommittees to hear testimony, build expertise, and take action on bills, and not rely on working groups, or leave detailed work for the House Floor. Committees should take the time necessary to do this work, even if it means holding bills over for multiple hearings, or having bills sent back from the floor to committee. Committee schedules, member schedules, and committee deadlines should be designed to facilitate this role.

•The House and the Senate should make it easier for the public to track bills, especially when bills from one chamber are substituted for companion bills from the other chamber, and when individual bills are rolled into omnibus bills.

•In establishing House rules and procedures, a primary consideration should be making the legislative process easier for the public to participate in and to follow. To the extent possible, the process should be made more transparent to the public, including specifically allowing the public to track movement of language between bills. Transparency is an important part of decision-making in a representative democracy.

•In establishing meeting schedules, the House should take into account the time demands on members who have other jobs. The Minnesota Legislative schedule was designed to be part-time. Specifically, it met during the winter post and pre-harvest. The legislature was never meant to be a full-time undertaking. There needs to be a balance between an individual’s legislative, employment, and home life. Too many good legislators are lost to this imbalance.
I disagree with this change

•The minority caucus should have proportional representation on all committees and divisions. There should be a premium on issue expertise.

•House and Senate committees with similar jurisdictions should facilitate joint hearings. These committees could be scheduled to meet at the same time, to facilitate joint hearings. However, if this is done, committee chairs and staff would need to coordinate to make sure members of the public can participate in the meetings of committees in both the House and Senate when they don’t meet jointly. I believe the Minnesota House and Senate were specifically devised to be separate. We should not compromise our legislative system solely for expediency.

•The House should establish a process under which aggregate time limits can be established for debate on all amendments to a bill. I am whole heartedly against time limits for floor debate. Limits are likely to increase hasty decision-making and could deprive people of public discussion of important issues. Debate and is a necessary and component of American Democracy.

•Legislative leadership and committee chairs should be more willing to say “no” at various points in the process, in part as a means of reducing time spent on matters that are not likely to advance. This seems to run counter to the goal of providing for the public good. Not every piece of legislation will be advanced but it’s an important part of the democratic process to allow various issues to be heard in the committee process. Allowing a select few from leadership to shutdown an issue for a hearing is not very inclusive and could stifle the development of new policy ideas.


I am ambivalent about this change
•The house should hold more hearings away from the Capitol, including possibly mini-sessions in Greater Minnesota during the interim

•The House should consider the scheduled time of floor sessions in relation to scheduled committee meeting times, in particular with regard to potential inconvenience to the public and to House members if meetings/sessions run longer than expected.

•The legislature should attempt to create reasonable expectations for the media and for the public about what the legislature can accomplish and what process is necessary for the legislature to conduct its business.
•The House should make legislative service more family friendly for House members by limiting evening meeting and limiting meetings on Friday afternoons and Monday mornings.

Pawlenty Should Appoint an Interim U.S. Senator

No candidate for Minnesota's contested U.S. Senate seat currently has an election certificate.

Governor Tim Pawlenty has the power and authority to appoint an interim U.S. Senator.

I urge Governor Tim Pawlenty to appoint someone on an interim basis to fill the current U.S. Senate vacancy. The people of Minnesota deserve due representation in U.S. Senate during these difficult economic times. Important decisions about our collective economic challenges are being considered right now at the highest reaches of government and Minnesota is playing with a handicap!

What's in the stimulus bill??

$32 billion to transform the nation's energy transmission, distribution, and production systems by allowing for a smarter and better grid and focusing investment in renewable technology.

$16 billion to repair public housing and make key energy efficiency retrofits.

$6 billion to weatherize modest-income homes.

$10 billion for science facilities, research, and instrumentation.

$6 billion to expand broadband internet access so businesses in rural and other underserved areas can link up to the global economy.

$30 billion for highway construction;

$31 billion to modernize federal and other public infrastructure with investments that lead to long term energy cost savings;

$19 billion for clean water, flood control, and environmental restoration investments;

$10 billion for transit and rail to reduce traffic congestion and gas consumption.

$41 billion to local school districts through Title I ($13 billion), IDEA ($13 billion), a new School Modernization and Repair Program ($14 billion), and the Education Technology program ($1 billion).

$79 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cutbacks to key services, including

$39 billion to local school districts and public colleges and universities distributed through existing state and federal formulas, $15 billion to states as bonus grants as a reward for meeting key performance measures, and $25 billion to states for other high priority needs such as public safety and other critical services, which may include education.

$15.6 billion to increase the Pell grant by $500.

$6 billion for higher education modernization.

$20 billion for health information technology to prevent medical mistakes, provide better care to patients and introduce cost-saving efficiencies.

$4.1 billion to provide for preventative care and to evaluate the most effective healthcare treatments.

$43 billion for increased unemployment benefits and job training.

$39 billion to support those who lose their jobs by helping them to pay the cost of keeping their employer provided healthcare under COBRA and providing short-term options to be covered by Medicaid.

$20 billion to increase the food stamp benefit by over 13% in order to help defray rising food costs.

$87 billion for a temporary increase in the Medicaid matching rate.

$4 billion for state and local law enforcement funding.

Stimulus Must be Zero Fail Mission

Everyone seems to have a opinion on the Federal Stimulus package, including yours truly.

You could be a:

Pro:
"Let's stimulate now to avoid even further financial disaster," or
"If we don't act we will be starring into the next great depression," or
"Start the money flowing and stop the bleeding," or
"We need spending on shovel ready jobs now."

Con:
"We are digging ourselves into a further financial hole" or
"We are borrowing from our future to pay for today" or
"Generations of future Americans will be paying for our financial decision of today" or
"An average American can't deficit spend themselves out of debt."

What we should all agree on is the severity of the problem. Now of course it does not pay to be an eternal pessimist doom and gloom guy but the American public should realize the gravity of the situation. Both a prolonged recession deepening into a depression and the proposed unchecked deficit spending has significant drawbacks. Each could have significant long term negative economic effects. The risk of doing nothing is a continuing of a financial "death spiral." The risk of doing something (deficit spending) is the negative financial effects that are shifted to future generations. Not to mention that deficit spending to stimulate the economy right now has a sort of artificial effect on the market place. Buoying certain sectors of the economy but not others. Surely, we are counting on the ripple effect but those have got to be some ripples. So it seems we have to make the best decision from the worst of options. The risks and stakes are high and there will be very little room for error. The newly elected President Barack Obama, Congress, and indeed all Americans and world citizens are on a mission for economic recovery. It's a zero-fail mission!

Inaugural Speech Equals Ambitious (Policy) Ideals

Inaugural Speech Equals Ambitious (Policy) Ideals
Quote: On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the
recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

Implication: Work with me new Congress!

Quote: We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish
things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry
forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the Godgiven
promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure
of happiness.

Implication: Equality for all in their chances for success.

Quote: “Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.”

Policy Implication: Federal Stimulus in the style of a Works Project Administration (WPA).

Quote: We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technologies wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost.

Policy Implication: Legalizing government funding for stem cell research and single payer health care.

Quote: We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.

Policy Implication: Promotion of green technologies.

Quote: Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate
wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful
eye, the market can spin out of control - and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors
only the prosperous.

Policy Implication: More regulation of free markets.

Quote: The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our
Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity
to every willing heart - not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

Policy Implication: Re-distribution of wealth. Tax cuts for 95% of Americans. Tax increases for those in the top 5% income earning brackets.

Quote: Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and
tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone
cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power
grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of
our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

Policy Implication: A clear preference to diplomacy before any military action.

Quote: We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in
Afghanistan.

Policy Implication: War ends in Iraq. Transfer of power to Iraqi’s. Increase pressure in Afghanistan to finish the conflict effectively.

Quote: To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.
To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the
West - know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To
those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that
you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to
unclench your fist.

Policy Implication: Ending religious fanaticism, terror, and destruction the U.S. attempt to reach out and foster new relationships throughout the world.

Quote: To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and
let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds.

Policy Implication: Increasing in foreign aide, likely through the United Nations.

Quote: For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the
American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the
levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose
their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a
stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides
our fate.

Policy Implication: Responsibility to family and community must re-emerge as societal virtues.

Ending Quote:

"Let it be told to the future world...that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue
could survive...that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet
[it]."

America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember
these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure
what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we
refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on
the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it
safely to future generations.

Rolland Burris Should be Seated

Trust me I like clean government as much or more than anyone. Obviously, I don't condone Governor Blagojevich's actions. They may have him 'dead to rights' on the charge of corruption in attempting to sell Barack Obama's vacant Senate seat to the highest bidder but he is 'innocent until proven guilty.' He is still the current Governor of Illinois, at least for now, and therefore he still has the power and the right to appoint a successor.

Rolland Burris should be seated as any other duly appointed Senator. The seal and the signature on his certificate should be applied and he should occupy his seat immediately.