Republicans are Hard to Define - But I Think This Helps Define Who Democrats Are

I chose to write a new Letter to the Editor for the ABC Newspapers in May.  Calvin Bahr of Oak Grove wrote a complaining letter in April that suggested he couldn't recognize his Republican Party.  As I write below, it is tough to figure out which Republican represents his or her party, but I think it's much easier to find the basic, consensus Democrat/DFL principles...

Calvin Bahr of East Bethel recently lamented where his Republican Party has gone.  I can understand Calvin’s confusion.  Are Republicans a libertarian party (Paul), a traditional pro-business, Chamber-of-Commerce party (Bush), a Christian fundamentalist party (Huckabee, Dr. Carson), a big-money, hate-anything-liberal party (Cruz), an elitist-corporatist party (Fiorino), an anti-union, budget-busting party (Walker), an American exceptionalist, anti-federal government party (Rubio), or a plain old Tea-Party organization (Bachmann, King, et-al)?

 

I am a Democrat from SD 35.  We’re not all peas-in-a-pod either, but many of us hold the same basic Democratic principles.

 

Most Democrats believe in international approaches to solving world problems – we tend not to be isolationists or America First types. 

 

Most Democrats believe in working persons’ rights – the right to unionize and the right to collectively bargain for wages, benefits and terms and conditions of employment. 

 

Most Democrats fear the power of an unchecked corporate America, and I have yet to meet a Democrat who doesn’t want to see the Citizens United decision overturned.

 

Many Democrats love to hunt and fish and own guns.  Fewer of us own guns than Republicans, probably.  However, many Democrats see the dangers in uncontrolled firearm ownership and usage – military-level guns don’t belong in regular citizens’ hands.

 

Some Democrats are pro-life – we’ve had pro-life candidates like Peterson in the 7^th and Perske in the 6^th.  A majority of Democrats are likely pro-choice; abortion is legal in this nation, and when necessary, we support a woman’s right to choose abortion.  Many Democrats do not ground these societal concerns in religious terms like Republicans do.

 

Democrats are very inclusive – far more so than our Republican counterparts.  Democrats have been champions of civil rights, women’s rights, and gender rights for the past 50+ years.

 

Democrats believe government works.  Democrats are derided by some as the “tax and spend” party.  Taxes are the government’s source of revenue.  We spend to protect our communities, protect our environment, provide an infrastructure, provide for our aged and needy, and to provide an educational system that works.  In my view, Democrats generally put community and others ahead of self-interest and profiteering.

 

Wes Volkenant

Andover

Harold Hamilton 'Gives Us a Plug' (Yeah, Sure) and I Decide to Reply to Union Herald Letter 'on The Record'

The Anoka County Watchdog, Harold Hamilton's website (woof, woof) took a shot at we liberal Democrats in his March 13 update, saving his venom for an old friend of ours, Roger Johnson. 

Roger sent a letter to the Union Herald criticizing the choice of The Record and its publisher's ties to Harold Hamilton. Roger's just one of many such letter writers... I have written, Mel Aanerud wrote, as did Jim Abeler and another good acquaintance, Dee Ann Christensen.   So, if you like to read about one particular right-wing view of the world, The Watchdog is the place for you.

This past week, the Union Herald published a letter from a Scott Cords of Ramsey, who responded to my own letter criticizing the choice of The Record.  I published that in this blog recently.  Here's from Cords' letter:

Different view on county’s public notice decision

To the Editor:
In response to Wes Volkevant’s March 6th letter, I would like to pose a different view of the situation. The public notices, over which there has been so much wailing and gnashing of teeth, are available online through the Anoka County Record’s website (www.anokacountyrecord.com) as well as current paper copies available at government centers and public libraries in Anoka County.

From the information I was able to gather, the cost to publish the information in the Anoka County Record’s publication is 40 percent of the cost bid by the ABC Newspapers.
On the surface, a pure cost basis analysis shows it was a good decision. The bidding process was fair and open. I would suggest that it was not only a good decision, but the County Board’s duty to change publishers in the interest of taxpayers.

On the topic of visibility, Anoka County has somewhere over 123,400 households. With recent circulation of 4,900, the ABC Newspapers covers 3.7 percent of the households in the county. Hardly the significant coverage Mr. Volkevant tries to describe. Anybody with some level of intellectual honesty should be able to admit that a vast percentage of those with significant interest in the public notices in question are likely willing and able to look elsewhere. I would submit that those really interested in such data does not wait for it to be published in paper format and delivered to their door.

I do support the Anoka County Board’s decision to change publishers and would say that it’s a waste of tax money to require paper publication of such data period. Since the law requires printing it, a 60 percent savings gets my support. Unless of course, Mr. Volkevant’s position is to spend more than twice the money for a publication that does not reach a meaningful percentage of the households in Anoka County. More than doubling the spending with no appreciable gain in value is the conflict of interest I see.

Scott Cords
Ramsey


I've written a reply to Mr. Cords, which should run sometime in April....

To the Editor:

 

I appreciate Scott Corbs providing an explanation of why the County Board’s action switching publications to The Record had merit in terms of cost and circulation.  As Mr. Corbs might expect, I disagree, and have reason to believe the County Board shouldn’t have simply chosen the less expensive option.

 

I believe County Board members are elected to spend taxpayer money – wisely, fairly, and appropriately.  I do not believe their focus should be merely to save us money and cut corners.

And, the County Board cut corners in taking an action that “saves taxpayer money” at the expense of tradition.  Print newspapers are traditional, but more importantly, state law says such notices are printed in newspapers.   There is protection in the printed word, which cannot be changed or erased at the press of keystrokes. 

 

Recall that The Record barely exceeds the 400 printed copies (about 0.3% of County households) required to be “legal.”  By comparison, the UnionHerald has a circulation 10 times that number – nearly 5000 households.  On a percentage basis that is like the Pioneer Press’s weekday circulation compared to State households.

 

That The Record could come in so much cheaper, is hardly surprising when considering its tiny staff publishes a free newspaper and mainly an online content, versus a newspaper that incurs considerably greater expense to be published.  Apparently, a main source of funding for this newspaper is Harold Hamilton, the wealthy benefactor from Fridley, where The Record maintains its small office at his company.  Hamilton’s “Watchdog” articles appear regularly in The Record as “paid advertisements,” and he finances key Republicans in Anoka County – County Board members and area legislators.  He has been successful, but his control comes at a cost to others. 

 

Reading those notices in The Record forces one to read Hamilton’s propaganda tabloid.  In addition to the “Watchdog”, the content regularly bashes DFLers and reprints elected Republicans’ press releases.  For us Democrats to go to this partisan Republican ‘newsletter’ to read notices would be like asking Mr. Hamilton to have to watch MSNBC every night for his daily news.  Unimaginable.

 

Wes Volkenant

Andover

One of my favorite bloggers also lives in Ramsey, like Mr. Cords.  But Developers are Crabgrass by Eric Zaetsch is from a very different end of the political spectrum - up where I hang out.  Eric wrote a very strong piece this weekend: 

Commercial reasonableness has a place in analysis of when competition might cross over to commercial predation. Pricing below cost to injure a competitior.


Here was one of my favorite sections....

"Wrongly so, the man implies. He defines one instance of something he alleges Murray was saying with an outright definitive "It's false" published factual assertion - by Kysylyczyn. Related to purported mention of possible investigations during discussion/negotiations which may have involved a possible "due diligence" aspect of public officials meeeting due diligence enquiry norms (instances outside of Nowthen in contexts apart from decision by Nowthen's council and/or administration in designating its official newspaper).

___________FURTHER UPDATE____________
To my knowledge, there is no definitive Kysylyczyn public statement on record of whether he's ever bought any printing ink or newsprint. And if so, how much, when?

Somewhere that ought to have been asked and answered of record, in the course of Record solicitation of official notice publication business within Anoka County and its municipalities. Ever. Newsprint. Ink. Delivery services. It is what one ordinarily thinks of in thinking of the commonly used term "newspaper," in commonly used contexts - including being honestly headquartered in county and "publishing" in-county a "newspaper" (as the term is commonly understood in ordinary usage)."


Thank you for your good work, Eric.

Separation of Church and State: Challenging Conservatives at Their Base Misconceptions

I support an organization known as Americans United: For Separation of Church and State.  Their stated mission is:  'Americans United for Separation of Church and State is a nonpartisan educational organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of church-state separation as the only way to ensure religious freedom for all Americans.'

They publish a magazine entitled Church and State.  In February 2015, author Rob Boston published an article, titled, "Myths Debunked"...... 

Myths Debunked

Religious Right Activists Love To Spread False Information About The Separation Of Church And State. Here Are Ten Rebuttals:

I appreciate the premise for writing this article, laid out by Boston in these introductory paragraphs:



"The United States was founded to be a Christian nation. Kids can’t pray in public schools. The Founding Fathers did not support separation of church and state.

These statements are articles of faith to the Religious Right. There is one problem with them, however: They’re all false.


"Myths about separation of church and state and its role in American history abound. Over the years, Religious Right groups have constructed an entire false narrative to compete with the real story of religious freedom in America.


"Under this faux-history, church-state separation was never the intention of the Founders, who yearned for an officially Christian America. The separation principle, the Religious Right argues, was imposed on the nation some years later by either the Supreme Court, “radical secularists” or communists – take your pick.


"Many scholars have debunked this line of thinking over the years, yet it persists. Why?  For people involved with Religious Right groups, the phony “Christian nation” version of history fills a psychological need. It lets them know that they were right all along. It provides a comforting myth of religious supremacism to combat the multi-faith, multi-philosophy America that so many of them find troubling.


"Followers of the Religious Right are probably a lost cause on this issue. Like creationists who find a way to ignore every piece of evidence for evolution, the “Christian nation” crowd will never be persuaded by facts.


"Many more Americans probably haven’t given the matter much thought. They may have dim memories of history class where Pilgrims and Puritans were discussed, and they may know that the theocratic systems favored by those groups didn’t prevail.  What they don’t know is how we got from there to where we are now – a nation with a secular constitution and complete religious freedom for all.


"Some of these people are, unfortunately, susceptible to Religious Right propaganda. Not knowing the whole story of how church-state separation evolved and how it has been applied by the courts, they might fall for Religious Right distortions.  In a sound bite age, it’s important to make arguments as succinct as possible."



Here are the ten myths:

Myth One: Separation of church and state isn’t found in the U.S. Constitution. Rather, it is a modern invention of the Supreme Court, a communist idea, something Nazis concocted, etc.

Thomas Jefferson and James Madison worked together to disestablish the Anglican Church and pass legislation that extended true religious freedom to all. Some years later, it was Jefferson who penned the metaphor of the First Amendment erecting a “wall of separation between church and state.”
Jefferson’s metaphor resonated with the public and the courts. Thus, the phrase “separation of church and state” came into being as a short-hand way of describing the First Amendment’s religion clauses.


Myth Two: The United States was founded to be a Christian nation.

This claim is easily debunked by referring to the text of the U.S. Constitution. If an officially Christian nation had been the Founders’ intent, the Constitution would say that explicitly. It doesn’t. In fact, it says the opposite.


Myth Three: Separation of church and state was originally intended to merely bar the creation of a national church.

The text of the First Amendment goes way beyond simply banning a national church. The amendment prohibits all laws “respecting an establishment of religion.” James Madison, one of the chief drafters of the amendment, interpreted it broadly. Madison believed that tax funding of churches was unconstitutional and even concluded, later in his life, that official White House proclamations calling for days of prayer were a violation.



Myth Four: Most of the Founders were evangelical Christians and supported government promulgation of that mode of faith.

Many Founders are identified as Deists, a theological school of thought that is less popular today. Deists believed in God but didn’t interpret the Bible in a literal fashion. They were skeptical of miraculous claims and sought to find a way to bring religion into alignment with the emerging scientific view of the world.   Some of the signers of the Constitution did undoubtedly hold traditional Christian beliefs. But this does not mean they supported merging church and state.


Myth Five: Mottos like “In God We Trust” on currency and “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance are evidence that separation of church and state was never intended.

“In God We Trust” didn’t appear on coins until the Civil War, when it was authorized for use on some coins minted in the North.  The Pledge of Allegiance was written in 1892 by Francis Bellamy, a minister and a socialist. Bellamy wrote the Pledge to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the voyage of Christopher Columbus. Bellamy’s Pledge, which did not include the phrase “under God,” appeared in a magazine called Youth’s Companion.  In short, the Founders had nothing to do with these religious mottos or their adoption.


Myth Six: Thanks to separation of church and state, kids can’t pray in public schools.

The U.S. Supreme Court in 1962 and 1963 banned programs of government-sponsored, compulsory prayer and Bible reading in public schools. The high court did not invalidate truly voluntary prayer and hasn’t done so since then.


Myth Seven: Separation of church and state fosters secularism, which drains religion of its vitality.

Official government secularism is not the enemy of faith; it is the defender of it. A secular state is one that is neutral on matters of theology. An official policy of government neutrality toward religion is a positive thing for faith communities.  The United States is a perfect example of how an official doctrine of secularism helps religion. In this country, the government long ago adopted a hands-off attitude toward religion. As a result, hundreds (if not thousands) of specific faith groups have sprung up on our shores. Religious groups remain vital, and most Americans claim a religious affiliation.


Myth Eight: Separation of church and state means that government must be hostile to religion.

The separation principle contains two key parts: The government is to refrain from promoting, sponsoring or advocating for any faith. Yet at the same time, the government is required not to meddle in the internal affairs of religious groups or impose undue regulations and oversight on them. Church-state separation protects religion by placing it beyond the reach of government.


Myth Nine: Most religious leaders don’t support separation of church and state.

In the modern era, many members of the clergy continue this proud tradition of support for church-state separation. Many religious denominations are on record as officially sup­porting the concept.

A minority of religious leaders disagree. Most of them belong to fundamentalist denominations that seek to use the power of government to control other people and impose their regressive dogma.


Myth Ten: Separation of church and state stifles the public voice and presence of religion.

Anyone who believes this hasn’t been paying attention. The United States operates under separation of church and state, yet religious groups have a loud and robust public voice. They speak out – from the left, right and center – on any number of political issues. As tax-exempt entities, houses of worship are not permitted under federal law to endorse or oppose candidates for public office, but there is nothing to stop them from addressing issues. Many do.

Consider just one issue that has been prominent lately: marriage equality. Houses of worship have been vocal on both sides of the debate. Many people have strong opinions about this issue, and religious denominations that oppose same-sex marriage have certainly encountered spirited opposition – but no one has tried to sanction or punish them for their views.

Nor does separation of church and state result in what one foe of the principle called a “naked public square.” It’s true that government may not post or erect religious symbols, but private religious groups are often able to use public space to display them with their own money and on their own time.

All that is required is that the government must treat all religious and secular groups equally; if access to public space is extended to one group, it must be extended to all. This is a simple matter of fair play, and it usually results in a vibrant public square full of many symbols, not a naked one.




Americans United is a non-partisan non-profit organization.  But I'm not.  The people who take advantage of the uninformed believers of these myths are the elected Republicans and their powerful supporters from the sidelines.  I'm a proud Democrat.  I would be surprised to find active, voting Democrats ever espousing these myths, let alone believing them.  Sadly, there are many who believe the non-truths passionately and with great fervor. 

Herein lies one continued wedge or dividing point between our parties.  So be it. But, if this divide continues, it is incumbent upon my party to frame the truths about separation of church and state and both rationally and passionately dispel these myths, and make it to our advantage politically to do so - to find, attract and keep the votes of Americans who understand the reasons for this separation, and who vote to uphold this American liberty, and to keep us from sliding further into becoming some type of Christian theocracy, as so many seem wont to do.

Why Did the Republican-Controlled County Board Hand Over Publication of Its Business to a Sivarajah Ally/Crony at His Financial Gain?

I've submitted the following Letter to the Editor to the ABC Newspapers for publication this month....

To the Editor:

 

Impropriety.  Conflict of interest.  The County Board’s decision to move publication of its business from the Anoka Union Herald to the Anoka County Record has drawn protest from the community because it is simply wrong, and steps over a line that is rarely crossed in this area.

 

Publication of the County’s business records is not a piece of partisan business.  It’s done to keep the community informed, to keep its vendors and potential vendors informed, and to establish, irony intended, a record of its business. 

 

Moving publication of its business to a partisan Republican-controlled ‘rag’ that is virtually unavailable in print to the community, that does not indicate its availability by subscription, or even appears in stores in every city of this large County, is a testament to both the lack of transparency and the intentional control of information this current Board chooses to practice in 2015.

 

Shame on the Board members who haven’t called out Board Chair Rhonda Sivarajah’s obvious conflict of interest in voting for this change. What conflict of interest? Anoka County Record’s publisher, John Kysylyczyn is listed on the Sivarajah website as its administrative and technical contact. Kysylyczyn gets a monetary gain by publishing the County’s business in his so-called newspaper. The Chair of the Board should have recused herself from voting on this issue.

 

Yes, as a DFL party leader in this community, I have my own partisan interest in opposing the use of a Tea Party-influenced publication receiving this contract from the Board.  But not because I’m a Democrat, but because this leaves citizens like me, who live somewhere in the County where this is not available to us, without access.  And that is wrong.  It would be hubris to expect this Board to reconsider its intemperate action, but it is right and proper for recent letter writers like Janet Entzel, Dee Ann Christensen, Beth Dhennin and now myself, to expect more of its Board members and to look for alternatives to address this political pay-off and conflict of the public’s best interest.

 

Wes Volkenant

Andover

SD 35 DFL Chair

Thank you to my proofreaders for this one, as I stride to have my facts and understandings correct within the context of the innuendo that I have put forth.

Our northern suburbs friend at "Developers are Crabgrass" covered this change himself, in late-January...  http://zaetsch.blogspot.com/2015/01/a-bad-joke-from-band-of-jokers-set-on.html.  This will provide you a link to the original story from the Union Herald about the Board's action.  I am disappointed that newly-elected Commissioner Gamache, who I publicly supported in this Blog, voted with the majority.  I hope that if an opportunity to reconsider arises, that he'll do that with a vote against the Record.

I've also appreciated the Letters to the Editor throughout February from the afore-mentioned women noted in my last paragraph.  Thank you Janet, Dee Ann and Beth for holding their feet to this fire of protest.

And, it was interesting to see myself addressed again in a 2/28/15 letter from Christian extremist Barb Anderson of Champlin.  Barb was addressing a letter I wrote last August (yep, SIX months ago)to complain that Republicans don't have a lock on morality in the United  States.  Well, shockingly, Barb thinks Republicans better represent her literalist view of the Bible, which makes them better Christians than us DFLers, apparently.  As I said, shocking, isn't it?

Anti-Teacher Union Rhetoric from TV Ads - Offensive

Norm Coleman. Education reform.  Those terms don't fit together, do they?   But, as a former teacher, I'm offended to see Coleman's Minnesota Action Network buying post-election TV ad air time to paint those protective, head-in-the-sand teachers unions as the bad guys who are keeping good, young teachers out of parents' children's classrooms through teacher tenure rules, which protect seniority through the LIFO (last in, first out) lay-off rules.  

 

A flat out attack on teachers unions....

 

No one in his ad ever says that the senior teacher next door probably did just as exceptional work with his/her students, or that many of our jobs actually value the long-time, experienced staffer as having learned to do their work well and efficiently, and being able to provide guidance and mentorship to the new, young, inexperienced employee.  No, in teacher circles, somehow it's best to be 24, in your first or second year on the job, full of bright, young ideas and most importantly, energy and the presumed ability to better-relate to the kids.  As opposed to "old" mom or grandma figures in the classroom, who are over-paid, unable to relate to the kids, stuck in a rut, lazy or energy-less, and brainwashed into thinking the teacher's union is the only thing standing in the way of the principal or superintendent firing their sorry ass, so that the school can keep that new, energetic, less-well-paid instructor.

 

Teacher tenure and seniority rules are part of paying your dues - figuratively and literally.  Teachers aren't constantly looking over their shoulders, fearing repercussions from the powerful parents or political elements in their community.  Teachers aren't constantly in fear of someone "not liking" their style, their comments, their manner of dress, their religious or sexual preferences, or their participation - or lack thereof - in school or community activities.

 

Teacher unions have helped create a professionalism in the workplace, and have strengthened the middle class through better pay and benefits - which are often jealously resented by those less fortunate who see themselves as taxpayers giving these wages and benefits to others, instead of paying less taxes out of their own pockets.

 

Norm Coleman and his MN Action Network are only multiplying those resentments through this misguided and unfortunate ad campaign.  It's sad that this passes for mainstream Republican policy these days.

 

 

http://www.mnactionnetwork.org/education-reform/

 

 

 

Post-Election Reflections, 2014

Let's start with Andover, which this Blog states is where my observations originate from...

Councilwomen Julie Trude and Sherri Bukkila faced each other to replace Mike Gamache as Mayor of Andover.  Trude gave up her seat, while Bukkila had a "free shot" with her term ending in two years.

This was a close, close result.  My choice, Julie Trude was elected Mayor of Andover by just 0.6% of the vote - 5250 (50.00%) - 5184 (49.37%).

Councilwoman Bukkila will return next term with Mike Knight - they both face the voters again in 2016, unless long-time Council member Knight retires in 2016.

There were four candidates for two Council seats this year (the open Trude seat and Tony Howard's, and Tony was seeking re-election).  There were three challenges to Howard - Val Holthus, who I strongly supported; James Goodrich, who I opposed; and Tanya Kostick, who was somewhat unknown, even after a LWV debate and candidate profiles.  I voted for Howard and Holthus.

So the results were mixed, as Val Holthus was elected, but so was James Goodrich as they defeated Kostick and incumbent, Howard (who may have been hurt by his strong support for city involvement in the expansion of the Community Center/YMCA).   Final vote totals were:

Nonpartisan	VAL HOLTHUS	4966  -	29.77%
Nonpartisan	JAMES GOODRICH	4713  -	28.25%
Nonpartisan	TONYA KOSTICK	2651  -	15.89%
Nonpartisan	TONY HOWARD	4290  -	25.72%

I spent a lot of time and energy this fall on behalf of Peter Perovich, our DFL candidate in 35A.  I'm disappointed Peter lost to newcomer, Abigail Whelan, and was surprised by the margin of victory, having expected a result more in line with Peter's narrow loss to Branden Petersen in those same precincts in 2012.  Thank you, Peter, for being our candidate in 2014!  I know the right thing will be to wish Ms. Whelan well, but it is so frustrating to see such an undeserving person elected to represent half my district in St. Paul.  It isn't just that she's a Christian Right, Tea Party-lite Republican, whose values and issues positions I detest - and frankly fear for our future as a result - but as a young woman barely out of school, having done NOTHING in this world to merit being a State Representative (compare her with the resumes of GOPers like Jeff Weaver, Matt Look, even Justin Boals, who she beat in the Primary, and identify for me what she has done for Anoka or for Anoka County or for District 35 prior to running for this office at the beginning of this year).   So yes, I'm frustrated that a middle-of-the-road Democrat, with life experiences and leadership responsibilities, didn't earn the votes of voters in District 35A.

Sam Beard was our endorsed candidate in 35B, and until the last 10 days of the campaign, when I saw three more "Beard" signs up, a printed piece of campaign literature, a new Facebook page, and even some Facebook ads, I thought Sam had a campaign in name-only vs. Peggy Scott.  Sam got beat by about 66% - 33%.  I guess we know our 35B baseline, and it ain't pretty for any of us, including me, who might have entertained notions to run ourselves.  Yes one can run, because voters deserve a choice, but as young Matt Gieseke, who ran down in Waconia area, lamented last night, knowing you'll lose badly, and losing badly, is still hard to swallow in the end.

Along with my surprise at the largeness of Peter's loss was my surprise at similar results for JD Holmquist (thought his efforts would gain him some support at the polls) and Jefferson Fietek, who was a great campaigner, had a great organization, and still got clobbered by a guy who barely won in 2012, in Mark Uglem.   Hmmm...  If a modestly-run campaign loses by about the same margin as two very intensely run campaigns, we DFLers in this part of Anoka County have a lot of thinking and planning to do in 2015.


Very frustrated that rural Minnesota took in a lot of lies about the $90 million vs $77 million dollar Senate Office building, and the lies about getting over-taxed when in fact most of us got tax refunds in 2014.  Gridlock and tension ahead.   Creepy Republican time - guys like Backer and Miller got elected - very stupid, sleazy people going to St. Paul from that part of the State.

Glad the Statewide DFLers all won - Franken, Dayton, Swanson, Otto and Simon.  It was the best part of last night - going to that Elections page at the SOS website!

Worst part of last night - watching the GOP Senate & Gubernatorial landslide unfold as nearly every squeaker led to a GOP win, except NH and VA.   Hate seeing those GOP Governor anti-union assholes re-elected - Scott, Snyder, Kasich (no surprise) and Walker.  Ugh!  Feel real bad for union men and women across this country, especially my AFSCME brothers and sisters.


Finally, Mayor Mike Gamache was elected to the Anoka County Board by 500 votes, defeating former legislator and Board member Debbie Johnson, apparently riding on the great familiarity Andover voters have for him.

These were very interesting results, contrasting the Andover precincts with those in Coon Rapids and Fridley...
                                                              GAMACHE  JOHNSON  WRITE-IN

Anoka: ANDOVER P-3	855	430	13
Anoka: ANDOVER P-4	610	312	7
Anoka: ANDOVER P-9	707	328	4
Anoka: ANDOVER P-10	767	333	5
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-2 P-1	431	461	5
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-2 P-2	248	362	4
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-2 P-3	466	556	9
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-2 P-4	288	313	4
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-2 P-5	318	344	2
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-3 P-2	323	418	2
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-3 P-3	323	348	4
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-3 P-4	255	402	2
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-5 P-1	373	469	2
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-5 P-2	399	488	8
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-5 P-3	194	306	2
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-5 P-4	134	187	0
Anoka: COON RAPIDS W-5 P-5	340	416	2
Anoka: FRIDLEY W-3 P-1	243	310	4
Candidate Totals:	7274	6783       79

In 35A, the StarTrib Endorses Whelan - Here's My Response on Why Peter Perovich Should be Elected Next Tuesday

Sadly, the Star Tribune endorsed Abigail Whelan for the open 35A House seat this year.  Peter Perovich deserves that endorsement, and he should be elected next Tuesday to represent Anoka and Ramsey in St. Paul.

Here's a link to the editorial:  http://www.startribune.com/opinion/editorials/280713082.html

And what they wrote in endorsing Whelan for the seat:

District 35A: Whelan

 

Republican Abigail Whelan is only 26, but her poise and commitment to public service belie her years. A vote for Whelan means betting on the come, but we think that’s a bet Anoka voters should make in the race to succeed retiring GOP Rep. Jim Abeler.

 

Whelan works as a home health care worker today, but she’s a former state Senate staffer and holds a master’s degree from the Humphrey School of Public Affairs. She proves her passion for public policy as she discusses possible remedies to the transportation funding shortage confronting Minnesota. Like most Republicans, she opposes more light-rail transit and a gas tax increase. But she supports better bus transit and is open to increasing other sources of transportation funding, including toll roads.

 

A proud product of the Anoka-Hennepin School District, Whelan believes that the district’s best practices should be emulated as schools strive to close the chronic achievement gap between white and nonwhite students. She’s an advocate for local control, going so far as to reject the state’s requirement for all-day kindergarten as an intrusion in local decisionmaking. We’d say that goes too far. But she also believes that MNsure, the state’s health insurance purchasing exchange, is too independent and that it should become a state agency for the sake of tighter legislative control. That suggests a capacity for nuanced judgment, one we hope will grow over time.

 

Whelan’s rookie status stands in contrast to her more-seasoned opponent, DFLer Peter Perovich, 52, a personal banker at U.S. Bank and former mortgage broker who is making his third try for a north-suburban legislative seat. Perovich comes by his interest in education and transit naturally. He’s the son of former Anoka Mayor Elliott Perovich, who also served as chair of the Regional Transit Board in the 1980s and was a high school principal.

 

Perovich is eager to spend more on education. Whelan focuses on best practices to improve results. That difference should matter to frugal north-suburban voters.

 

 

 

My Comments Posted to the Editorial Comment Section:

 

Disclosure up front... after 16 years of Jim Abeler's Republican representation of Anoka, I have been working hard this campaign to elect Peter Perovich, the DFL candidate for this open 35A seat in Ramsey and Anoka.  The Star Tribune editorial board, which I hardly find particularly pro-DFL, nor progressive on the key issues of the day, should be greatly faulted for putting their weight on young Abigail Whelan's shoulders.

This is a young woman who has never owned a home or paid property taxes, works part-time while living at home, started her campaign on a platform of Christian Right values that greatly echoed Michelle Bachmann for the extremism she sought to bring to office, and as the campaign developed, has wrapped herself in Jim Abeler's mantle, despite the fact that her wing of the SD 35 Republican Party has tried to eject Abeler multiple times in the past. 

Peter Perovich has the maturity and gravitas needed to represent the Anoka area in the House.  He's a relatively moderate Democrat - he and I have different takes on many issues - but I respect how he puts his community and his family values up front when arriving at his choices.  For example, for much of the summer, he made Sundays a family day, as, with four kids, two still at Ramsey Elementary, he made "Dad" time despite working full-time at the bank and campaigning, as well.  That's the type of guy I want in St. Paul - one with his priorities in the right place. 

I don't want toll roads in the north suburbs - Peter advocates improving Highway 10 to freeway status beyond Anoka City limits.  Facing nearly hour-long commutes from Ramsey, I think our voters continue to demand good rail transit options to both downtowns. 

DFLers are proud of getting the all-day Kindergarten choice enacted - I'm shocked the Star Tribune editorial board is pleased with Abigail Whelan's opposition to this badly-needed reform for early childhood development. 

The editorial board spent too much time talking to Jim Abeler about this race, apparently, because despite whatever pretences Abeler's built up as a "health insurance expert" through the years, this 26-year old young lady, who worked at St. Paul under Sens. Petersen and Jungbauer - two of the most obstructionist, deep-red conservatives of the past decade, has hardly developed any expertise on health issues.  Her "nuanced" answer on MNSure as a state agency, probably scripted for her by Abeler, who appeared to have helped script her answers in all three debates/forums she took part in this fall, is both silly and contrived - especially coming from the Party noted for its efforts to "chop down state government" - why would they create a new state agency for state health care programs, when DHS has been doing its damndest to get it right, after the Republican legislature of 2011-2013, left them little time to put in place a whole new system that should have gotten 3-4 years of testing to get it implemented right. 

Peter Perovich's greatest possible contribution as a legislator will be his efforts to protect our rivers, lakes, ponds and streams, as he has taken a statewide leadership on behalf of bass fisherman and has formed serious plans on protecting our waters from harmful run-offs and usage issues.  I don't know what one issue Abigail Whelan can be a difference-maker about in St. Paul, but I know Peter Perovich will be a legislator who leaves a lasting legacy for our Millennials in the decades to come!

 

Next Letter to the Editor - Transportation Issues - Vote Perovich & DFL vs GOP's Whelan in 35A

I've sent the following Letter to the Editor of the ABC Newspapers, hoping it will be printed this month, although I've checked, and it will not be in the September 19th print editions...   As the letter notes, expect next year at the Legislature to be focused on our transportation issues - this means infrastructure concerns, movement of people and goods, long-term sustainability of a late-20th Century transportation system....  Over in Anoka & Ramsey, I think Peter Perovich has long-focused on these issues in his campaigns.  I see Abigail Whelan has adopted a position on this issue, as she attempts to move her focus away from just the evangelical Christian Right issues that she first announced her campaign would fight for when she announced last winter.  The rare Republicans who chose to vote for forward thinking and overrode the Pawlenty veto, suffered the repercussions in their party, just as the few who supported same-sex marriage have suffered in 2014.  Last session, Abeler, Scott and Petersen all marched in lock-step against the DFL majority's transportation bill.  Why should we expect any differently of young Whelan - does anything about her convey an independent streak that would vote against her party leadership on such matters?  Here's my letter...

To the Editor –

 

2015 is going to be the year of transportation.  Governor Mark Dayton, Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk and House Speaker Paul Thissen have all declared transportation funding to be the top priority next year.

 

Minnesota needs to expand its transit options, make better connections for bicycling and walking, repair its aging roads, and replace its 100-plus deficient bridges.

 

Fixing the transportation deficit will create jobs, and improve our safety, our health and our environment.

 

Peter Perovich, the DFL candidate for the State House in District 35A, writes (http://peterperovich.org), “Our transportation must be safe and reliable for families and businesses; we need to improve our roadways.  I will continue to invest in roadways and Anoka County’s transportation.  I will work to make Highway 10 a freeway, not a highway that slows commuters.  I will also work to address the public concern with Highway 47.”

 

To be fair, Peter Perovich’s Republican opponent has also put forth a strong pro-road safety and Highway 10 improvement package among her key issues.  But, that’s meaningless when her party votes against responsible transportation bills, simply to oppose the DFL majority.  In 2013, HF 1444, the Transportation Finance Bill Conference Committee Report, was opposed by conservative groups such as Americans for Prosperity, and sure enough, area Republicans Abeler, Scott and Petersen each voted against it.  Why would we expect differently from Abigail Whelan?  The last time a Transportation Bill had helped our area, in 2008, both Republicans Abeler and Tinglestad became notorious members of the “Override Six” for voting against Governor Pawlenty’s veto – and Tinglestad was later forced out.

 

The DFL-led legislature accomplished much for Minnesota in 2013-2014.  By electing Peter Perovich on November 4th, voters can expect support for these DFL platform positions in the 2015-2016 legislative session:

·         Support a comprehensive transportation-funding package that will generate new economic development opportunities throughout the state;

·         Support strong public investment in transportation infrastructure to address structurally deficient and functionally obsolete bridges and roads;

·         Support healthy urban growth through regional light rail and other mass transportation systems.

The Other Side is Reading this Blog - So Let's Address Social Issues Raised by an Oak Grove Republican This Week

I was surprised - alarmed - nah, more amused - that this blog was noticed by the Anoka County Republican Wizard of Oz - Henry Hamilton, the wealthy, anti-union, curmudgeonly purveyor of Republican truths and gossip at both The Minnesota Watchdog and the Anoka County Watchdog websites.   http://www.anokacountywatchdog.com/email/2014/08.22.14_update.htm

You've got to visit his Anoka County page - I love the barking bulldog you have to click on to enter.  Classic Watchdog.  And of course, if you access the link above, you'll find that Mr. Hamilton took exception to my views on Andover Representative Peggy Scott and Andover Council candidates James Goodrich and Val Holthus - I like Holthus, he doesn't.  I don't like Goodrich.  He does. 

Like Mike Jensen of Anoka, who reviewed my own history in a recent Letter to the Editor, Henry goes into detail about me, too.  Seemingly, it's only preferable to be rich entrepreneurs and businessmen, or the people working for people like Henry Hamilton, in Henry's world.  Not so, hardworking public employees like Teachers and Social Workers and Child Support Officers and Snow Plow Drivers and Revenue Office Agents and Mental Health Professionals and Planners and Financial Workers and Librarians - especially those who made it a point to be activists in their unions working to get better wages, benefits and contract provisions that help employees perform their work in safe, secure environments.  He raises up and stresses that Val Holthus and I belong to Education Minnesota and AFSCME, respectively, as if our union membership makes us somehow criminals for fighting on behalf of our fellow employees.  As if those who work in public jobs should only settle for wage crumbs with no protection from being terminated every time as new party takes office and wants to dispense political favors to friends and family - you know, like the good old days in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Well, I'm proud to have been a member of both teacher associations and AFSCME throughout the 35+ years I've been part of the middle class workforce, Mr. Hamilton.  I've been proud to be a part of the public employee payroll.  I didn't set out to be rich.  I set out to help people - first as a teacher and later working in the public assistance system in Minnesota.  There are far more people in this world who need our help, Henry Hamilton, than the One-Percenters like you, and I'm just one of many who chose to work in service to others - and expect to be paid our worth, to be safe at work, and to be protected from willful employers.


Gene Hodel, a Republican from SD 31 in Oak Grove, pushed my buttons this week.  In a Letter to the Editor in the ABS Newspapers, Hodel wrote: 

"Our Creator set the foundation of moral behavior. The Democratic party represented by their current platform and their history are on the wrong side of most moral issues. The social conservative side, represented by the Republican party is not without its flaws, but on most of these moral issues the Republican platform is correct.
 
Of course, it if you think it is a woman’s on demand “right”, to kill the human being inside of her, then you would vote for the Democrats.  If you think that an active gay life style does not accelerate sexual diseases, bad influence on the youth and broken lives, then you would vote for the Democrats. If you think that gay marriage is the same as a marriage between a man and a woman for rising children and supporting each other, then you would vote for the Democrats. If you want your fellow human beings messed up on marijuana coming at you down the highway, vote for the Democrats."
http://abcnewspapers.com/2014/08/20/letters-to-the-editor-for-aug-22-2014/


Now, as a Democrat living in the area, as the DFL Chair of Senate District 35, as a pretty good, upstanding citizen, and as a fellow raised in the United Methodist Church, I took exception to Mr. Hodel's characterizations of what is and isn't moral.

So, I've penned a new Letter to the Editor (below), which I hope gets printed as a response to Mr. Hodel.

This election should be a referendum on Governor Dayton and the DFL.  But social issues still rear their ugly head. Gene Hodel wrote, “On most of these moral issues the Republican platform is correct,” in an August 22^nd Letter.  Of which moral issues did he say Republicans are right and Democrats are wrong:  terminating pregnancies, blaming sexual disease on gay lifestyles, gay marriage and marijuana use?

 

Life would be much simpler for voters if his old canard that Democrats are undeserving amoral libertines, while Republicans are God-fearing model citizens was true.  Alas, it isn’t.  As Chair for District 35 DFLers, it’s been my pleasure to “politic” with a lot of your friends and neighbors, who are bright, community-spirited Christians – and Democrats.  Republicans don’t own the concept of “morality” in this community, any more than they own “bigotry”, “intolerance” or “patriotism.” 

 

Is it moral for Christian Republicans like Gene to continue their determined disregard of the Roe v. Wade decision, which provided a legal basis for “life” does not begin at conception, that a child does not legally exist until birthed, and that there are limitations to how far into a pregnancy abortion is legal? 

 

Is it moral for Christian Republicans like Gene to rely on their interpretations of the laws and customs of 2000-year old Biblical societies to determine 21^st century morality?   Who decided that being gay or different is immoral?

 

Is it moral to reject the common decency and fairness of providing legal equality through same sex marriage?  Is it moral to go sticking one’s nose into what goes on in other persons’ bedrooms?

 

On marijuana, it’s hardly a moral issue; one will find many Democrats, myself included, who have reservations about legalizing it, even for medical purposes, and similarly, one will find many libertarian Republicans who fully support less-restrictive laws on marijuana.

 

I haven’t even started on the moral issues of fighting poverty, the rich getting richer, equal justice for minorities, or easy access to assault weapons.  No party has a monopoly on morality, Mr. Hodel.  Oh, and about that referendum – my side should win!

 

2014 City of Andover Candidate Filings are Complete for Mayor and Council - My Endorsements for November

Below, you will find the 2014 field, as found at the MN Secretary of State's Office site. 

We have two capable, experienced Council members, both women, running for Mayor in 2014.  Having run against and lost to Julie Trude, I developed a strong appreciation in the 2010 race for her representation of our City.  I can not picture a better representative voice for our community.  She is a leader, she is thoughtful in her position, she reaches out for many opinions, and she makes pragmatic decisions based on the information has collected on the concern.  I respect Sheri Bukkila, who begins many issues in a different perspective than I do, but I am less certain about her ability to reach out and represent the various communities and opinions of Andover residents.  For that, I strongly endorse Julie Trude for Mayor of Andover in 2014.

For City Council, a friend and long-time Andover resident and community leader, Val Holthus, has filed for what is basically the Trude vacancy on the Council.  There are two city-wide Council seats on the ballot this year.  I strongly endorse electing Val Holthus to one of those seats.  Val has worked tirelessly on the City's Planning Commission for many years, she has been a long-time teacher in Anoka-Hennepin and works hard to better our education community through the teacher's association.  And she and her family represent Minnesota values - a look at her Facebook page shows both a proud fishing champion and a proud Mother, whose daughter has been pageant royalty this past year.

Of the remaining three candidates, I don't know Tonya Kostick and will be pleased to meet her and read more about who she is and why she is running.  I posted about James Goodrich last month.  Mr. Goodrich is doing a lot of good campaigning - prominently displayed signs, strong web page, etc.  He is clearly part of the political community I strongly oppose and abhor.  He may be a good fit for many Andover residents.  Certainly, our Republican-Democrat polling results reflect that.  Nonetheless, Andover does not need a second Hennepin County Sheriff's Deputy on its Council, representing the same religious right, pro-gun, heavily-tilted law enforcement viewpoints that Councilwoman and possibly Mayor Bukkila addresses right now.  I will not vote for or recommend a vote for James Goodrich.

Depending on what I learn of candidate Kostick, I am tentatively supporting and recommending the re-election of Tony Howard to fill the other Andover Council seat in this election.  Tony lost in 2010, as I did.  He came in third, I believe behind Julie Trude and Don Jacobson.  When Don resigned soon after, Tony was appointed to fill the term and then won election for two years in the 2012 Special Election.  Tony is a man of good character, a strong family man and community leader, a successful businessman, and another realist, who does not seem to be carrying an agenda in serving the community on the City Council.  I am most likely voting for Howard and Holthus this fall.


http://candidates.sos.state.mn.us/CandidateFilingResults.aspx?county=2&municipality=1486&schooldistrict=&hospitaldistrict=&level=3&party=0&federal=True&judicial=False&executive=True&senate=True&representative=True&title=&office=0&candidateid=0

2014 State General Election Candidate Filings

Use this candidate finder tool to find candidates running for office in the November 4, 2014, State General Election. Candidates for federal, state and county offices are added as filings occur. Candidates for local offices may continue to be added after the filing period. Candidate Filing Periods: Federal, state and county offices, and local offices that hold primaries: Tuesday, May 20–Tuesday, June 3 Other municipal and school district offices: Tuesday, July 29–Tuesday, August 12 Contact your local clerk for the correct filing period for your city or school district. Filing offices will be closed Monday, May 26, in observance of Memorial Day. Learn more about becoming a candidate and filing for office.

Candidates Search Results Andover Mayor (Andover) Candidate Name Party Website File Date SHERI BUKKILA Nonpartisan www.sheribukkila.com 7/29/2014 JULIE TRUDE Nonpartisan JulieTrude.com 7/29/2014     Council Member at Large (Andover) (Elect 2) Candidate Name Party Website File Date JAMES GOODRICH Nonpartisan electjamesgoodrich.com 7/29/2014 VAL HOLTHUS Nonpartisan 8/12/2014 TONY HOWARD Nonpartisan 8/6/2014 TONYA KOSTICK Nonpartisan 8/1/2014

New Letter to the Editor - Why I Oppose Peggy Scott for 35B

I'm sending this new Letter to the Editor to the ABC Newspapers for publication in August, as an edited version (there is a 350-word limit) of the pro-Perske and pro-Perovich letter appeared in the July 9 issue of the Anoka Union Herald.  This is a response to the flyer we received from Peggy Scott in the mail on Saturday.  I take exception to it - in my opinion, it is shaded with false statements and innuendo.

To the Editor –

 

In her July campaign flyer disguised to appear like an official “2014 Legislative Report” to the voters of District 35B, Peggy Scott shares common Republican half-truths and lies.   Minnesota DFLers are proud of their 2013-2014 accomplishments, so what is the real record Scott is shading?

 

Peggy Scott falsely accuses paying for Obamacare will ‘drain’ $207.96 Million from our schools the next three years.  In reality, DFLers balanced the budget and repaid the $2.8 Billion which Scott and the Republicans “borrowed” from our schools when they were in charge.  DFLers provided funding for all-day kindergarten and hot school lunches.  They increased funding for early childhood family education and froze public college tuition for two years.  We can have Obamacare and smart school funding, too.

 

Peggy Scott finds it easy to criticize Obamacare, even while voting to prevent it from succeeding.  But health care changes have been very successful in Minnesota.  Over 180,000 Minnesotans are now covered by health plans, as our uninsured rate is down to 4.9%.  Over 50,000 seniors are saving hundreds for prescription drugs.  Over 35,000 young adults can remain on their parents’ insurance.  Over one million of us receive preventive health coverage with no additional co-pays.

 

Peggy Scott’s Republicans opposed the first increase in the minimum wage in a generation.  Over 300,000 state workers will receive a higher minimum wage of $9.50 in 2016.  Low-paid health workers will benefit greatly.  Low-paid child care workers who receive government funding seek higher rates and benefits through the opportunity to unionize.  Peggy Scott opposes giving this particular group the right to even vote on unionization – a right all workers should have.  Under the DFL leadership, over 100,000 jobs have been added, and unemployment is at a seven-year low.  Forbes Magazine rates Minnesota the 3^rd best state in which to make a living.  The DFL ensured equal pay for equal work would strengthen women’s economic security in the years ahead.

 

My candidate in 35B is Coon Rapids small-businessman Samuel Beard.  Vote to keep the successful DFL stewardship of Minnesota in place for the next two years.