Political Independence

Cynthia Kafut Hagen Demonstrates True Independence

2011-02-11T13:30:00.001-06:00

If you have been following the special election for State Representative in Legislative District 5B, you have certainly heard all of the important issues. You have heard from the state Republican Party that DFL endorsed candidate Carly Melin may not meet the residency requirements to qualify as a candidate. This would be an important issue if it were true, but the state Republican Party has chosen to contest her residency in the media, instead of with the courts. You have heard the state Democratic Party attack a controversial piece of campaign literature distributed by the state Republican Party. Just as the Republicans showed complete disregard for their candidate by issuing the piece without their candidate’s knowledge or approval, the Democrats showed the same level of disregard by issuing the condemnation of the piece from the state party instead of through their candidate.

These are the issues that the state Republican and Democratic Parties have been pushing and publicizing. These are the issues that they want you to base your decision on.

I attended the debate on Wednesday night. What I saw was telling, and troubling. The good news is that I saw three candidates who each had the work experience and civic involvement needed to represent the citizens of the Iron Range effectively at the State Capitol. The bad news is that I saw two candidates who were visibly uncomfortable with the position their respective parties had put them in.

Paul Jacobson, the Republican, was in the most obvious distress over the actions of his party. The Republican Party created and distributed a controversial piece of campaign literature without his approval, or even his knowledge. When asked, by the Democratic candidate, to condemn the piece, Jacobson replied that “Miss Melin does not know what my discussions have been with the party since then.” Unfortunately, neither do the voters.

When the candidates were asked what they would like the campaign to be focused on, Carly Melin stated very pointedly, “the issues”. She lamented that other things had stolen the spotlight. Unfortunately for Melin, her state party’s response to the Republican attacks has also played a role in keeping the focus off of “the issues”. Melin never took the opportunity herself to criticize her own party’s actions in this regard.

This leaves us with Independence Party endorsed candidate, Cynthia Kafut Hagen. She stated very clearly that “the law should be changed so that nobody can put out information that the candidate doesn't want. If the Independence Party did that to me, I would not be happy or with them still." As the incoming state party Chair, I was proud of her willingness to make that stand in front of me and the voters. That is a brave stand that her opponents have both shied away from.

Earlier that day, I was asked what the word Independence stood for in our party’s name. We are not a loose knit group of independent voters. We are a political party. We have a platform of issues that we expect our candidates to support. We believe that the word Independence means that members and candidates can support that platform in a manner that suites them and their constituents best. It means Independence from state party manipulation as a candidate and as an elected official. For voters, it means that the only dependence an Independence Party candidate has is on your support and your vote.

Cynthia Kafut Hagen demonstrates Independence perfectly.

The Real Reason We Should Support Bonding for Roads and Bridges throughout Minnesota

2011-02-11T10:08:00.002-06:00

Wednesday, I drove from Maplewood to Hibbing to attend a debate between the 3 major party candidates for State Representative in Legislative District 5b. The road conditions on Interstate 35 were appallingly bad. It appeared that every seam in the concrete had separated and degraded into crevasses measuring four to six inches across. Of course, this being the heart of winter, there were also numerous potholes ranging in size from divots to open pit mines. If my driveway looked that bad, the City of Maplewood would be justified in issuing me a citation for an unsightly and unsafe driveway.

The Democrats argue that the infrastructure projects needed to improve these roads create jobs. The Democrats go on to explain that more people on a payroll will lead to more spending which will lead to greater economic activity. Then the Republicans respond with their arguments that real job growth needs to come from business. They go on to explain how burdensome taxes are keeping our business community from expanding and hiring more people. We end up in a traditional disagreement between government spending and lower taxes. But spending and taxes are not the point of the original argument.

And that IS the point of this article. Partisan posturing by the two other major parties often causes us to lose sight of the real issues. Regardless of your stand on government spending and tax policy, the fact remains that our roads and bridges are falling apart and they need to be repaired or replaced sooner than later.

Because infrastructure projects are being bid at amazingly low prices, and because today’s investments in infrastructure will benefit the comfort and commerce of at least the next two generations, and because we still have a highly skilled construction workforce, we should support strong bonding measures to finance these critical infrastructure improvement projects.

Good Idea, Bad Timing

2010-11-30T08:39:00.002-06:00

Federal Highway Administration Is Ordering Local Governments to Buy New Street Signs That They Say Are Easier to Read

While I support the need to update traffic signs, this is a prime example of an unfunded federal mandate. The regulations require cities and counties to replace signs with 4" lettering with signs with 6" lettering by 2012 and that all signs must use reflective lettering by 2018. If the FHA wants any functional signs replaced by 2012, they can pay for the replacements themselves. In these tough economic times, if they expect cities and counties to pay the bill, they better relax the timing. I would support consolidating the lettering size and reflexivity requirements with the 2018 deadline. This would give communities one target date for all sign replacements and would allow them to spread the cost over several years. It would also make sense for communities to start following the regulations immediately when installing new signs or replacing damaged signs.

This means that cities and counties would still need to start budgeting and planning for the sign replacements now. Even though I support spreading the cost over several years, it is not intended to have communities wait until the last minute in hopes that they will be able to better afford the cost down the road.

Minnesota Conservatives attack Senator Wiger, and miss the mark.

2010-11-28T22:54:00.004-06:00

The Minnesota Conservatives blog that elicited this posting

Minnesota Conservatives, instead of demeaning Senator Wiger and his newsletter, why don't you (and the rest of the Republican Party for that matter) address the actual issues instead. The MN Conservatives blog argues that dropouts aren't worth the time or effort to save. Wow, that paints a positive picture of education as viewed through conservative eyes.

Instead of the thoughtless slander, do some research and point out that the current law has mandatory attendance through age 15 and that 16 and 17 year olds who do wish to withdraw must attend a meeting with their parents or guardians and school personnel. They must also sign a written election to withdraw form. In other words, it isn't easy for a 16 or 17 year old to withdraw under the current laws. At the same point, high school dropouts are at their lowest rate ever. The U.S. dropout rate for the 2007-2008 school year was 8.0%. That rate has fallen consistantly since 1980 (14.1%). Minnesota's rate is much lower and also falling with rates of 5.86% in 2007, 5.79 in 2008, and 5.54 in 2009.

I believe that Senator Wiger's goals are noble. I just find the legislation to be a safe way to demonstrate support for education without any real risk of being called out for poor results. Despite what the Minnesota Conservatives blog says, this law will require minimal change to current documents and procedures in schools. Cross out 16, insert 18, apply law as usual. My concern is that dropout rates are already falling to their lowest rates EVER. If rates continue to fall, is it because of the new mandatory attendance age or is it just a continuation of the trend? If the rates level off, or even rise, will people blame Senator Wiger's legislation? Of course not. This bill is an easy Win-Win for Senator Wiger, while having a minimal impact on current high school attendance in Minnesota. I would rather see the Senator quit playing it safe and tackle some real issues facing our schools and our district. I would start, as I proposed in my campaign, with pushing for more consistent funding from the State. If the State "certifies" funds to school districts, those funds should be off limits for any future budget shifts. I would also start working with school districts to find areas that can be scaled back, or temporarily discontinued in preparation for Republican funding cuts. Where possible, also work with them to find alternate funding for some programs.

I absolutely despise the Republican's knee jerk response to belittle the legislator with a D behind their names without even attempting to address the issues in front of them. Quit telling me Democrats are crazy out of touch liberals who want to turn our country into the next socialist republic. Tell me how you would do it different and how your results will be better than the Democrats.

Political Integrity and PACs

2010-08-02T09:22:00.007-05:00

Let me begin with an unusual confession. I have never been drunk. Honest! The initial reason for this is that I don't like the taste of beer and as a college student I couldn't afford anything harder. The continuing reason is more important. I quickly learned that my sobriety earned immense rewards in college. I was the guy that the girls trusted to walk them home after a night of drinking. I was the guy who never had to fight a friend for his keys in order to drive him home. I was the guy my friends could count on when their own judgement was a bit clouded. That trust was worth more than any buzz a few too many beers could give me.

Political integrity is much the same in my eyes. While I don't believe that taking money from political action committees is bad. I do think that too much of it can cloud a candidate's judgement. Recent campaign finance reports show that more than 66% of Senator Wiger's 2010 fundraising has come from lobbyists and political action committees. While the Senator has every right to accept those funds, I have made the commitment to the citizen's of Minnesota that I will not accept any contributions from PACs. This means that at the end of a long campaign season funded from the well of political action committees, you can trust that my judgement will be clear and my political commitment will be focused on the concerns of our citizens and not with the narrower interests of any political action committee.

Your trust is worth more to me.

New Years Resolutions

2010-01-15T22:50:00.003-06:00

Senator Wiger posted a nice article on his Senate site on December 22. As a student of success, and someone who is constantly challenging myself to improve, I appreciate his article. Here is an excerpt with some personal observations added.

What will you focus on in 2010? A recent article at successmagazine.com offers forty-four ideas on what you can do to “kick-start” your 2010. Here are some highlights from that list that could improve your year:

• Find a volunteer opportunity at www.volunteer.org.
MEJ - I volunteered for, and was appointed by the Maplewood City Council to the Maplewood Business and Economic Development Commission. I am looking forward to promoting economic opportunity in the great city of Maplewood.

• Sign up for a birthday/anniversary reminder service.
MEJ - I have kept every birthday and anniversary in my BlackBerry or PDA for over 10 years.

• Write a personal mission statement or mantra.
MEJ - This year's mission is to bring the citizens of Maplewood, Oakdale, North Saint Paul, and the rest of Minnesota an independent perspective on elections and service in state government.

• Get a whole new hairstyle or haircut.
MEJ - Well, I did promise my wife I would get haircuts more often this year. I tend to go too long between appointments, so just keeping my hair a consistant length will be a worthy goal.

• Do something that scares you.
MEJ - Most of my friends (Democrats, Republicans and Independents) think I should be scared of my State Senate race. I actually am excited by the challenge. I am scared of losing this race because of the prospect of continued partisan failure in Saint Paul and scared that I may let down the people who invest their time and effort in supporting my campaign. But at the end of the day, it is the fear of failure that drives me to work a bit harder and smarter to minimize the possibility.

• Take a dance or fitness class.
MEJ - I have scheduled a 10 month fitness regiment that consists of lots of walking and, well, lots of walking. I don't think door knocking and shaking hands can really be considered physical fitness.

• Schedule a regular date night on your calendar with your spouse.
MEJ - This hasn't been a challenge in the past, but with the rigors of a political campaign and launching a new city commission, this is a great idea for maintaining personal perspective and balance.

Remember, you cannot achieve all of your goals overnight. Many goals will take considerable time and effort, and they can evolve over time. Stay flexible, expect bumps along the way and above all, never give up.

As Ben Franklin once said, “Be always at war with your vices, at peace with your neighbors, and let each New Year find you a better man.” The New Year gives us all a chance to start over. Make 2010 a year to remember!

Now for a quotation that lies at the heart of my new year and my campaign:

"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that our aim is too low and we reach it."
Michelangelo

Letter to the Editor of the Maplewood Review

2009-10-02T12:47:00.004-05:00

Here is a letter I wrote to the Editor of the Maplewood Review. It is response to an article where I was quoted as the only citizen at a Maplewood City Council meeting to speak in support of Maplewood setting a maximum tax levy limit of 7%. As it was written, it sounded as if I supported an actual increase of 7%. I can't say today what level of increase I would support until the budget requests have been made and analysed. Read the letter for more.

Dear Editor,

Thank you for your coverage of the recent Maplewood city council meeting where the maximum tax levy for 2010 was set. As reported early in the article, this is the amount that the city can levy in taxes in 2010. This is not necessarily the amount that the city must levy. As the City Manager pointed out “It can be scaled back.” I also want to thank you for including my comments from that meeting in your article. As you quoted, I did support the City Manager’s recommendation to “keep their options open” and report a 7% maximum levy increase. I do want to clarify my overall stand on the city’s taxes though. While I did support reporting a 7% tax levy increase, I believe that even the smallest tax increase needs serious consideration and sound justification to the public before passage.

I am asking for this clarification because I am not just a “Maplewood resident”, I am a Maplewood resident who is running for the Minnesota Senate in 2010. I am running for the senate because I believe that the state has thrust too much of its budget mess into the hands of our cities and counties. Our cities are now caught between a rock and a hard place. On one side they have had significant funding cuts from the state and on the other side they have citizens who are tired of a government that thinks it can tax its way out of any problem. Between these two truths, we have a city that has to figure out how to provide adequate services with inadequate revenue. While I am sure that there are areas of the budget that can still stand another trim, the state has been withholding revenue from our cities for many years, and most of the fat was trimmed from city budgets over the past four or five years. While I am not a fan of raising taxes on the whole, this year’s city budget will probably require a reduction in services to prevent an increase in the tax levy.

As you watch Maplewood’s budget process unfold over the next 2 months, citizens have every right to hold the city council responsible for how they address the budget challenges before them. At the same time, we all need to hold our legislators and our Governor responsible for making cities pay for the state’s ongoing budget problems.

Thank you,

Mark Jenkins
Candidate for the Minnesota Senate in 2010
www.MarkJenkins2010.com

Independence Party of Minnesota 4th CD special meeting

2009-09-27T01:26:00.002-05:00

On Thursday, September 24th, the Independence Party held a special meeting in the 4th Congressional District to fill a couple vacant leadership positions. We had an impressive turnout with about a dozen delegates and several guests in attendance. State party Director Kari Johnson-Robinson, who rose to her state position through her involvement in the 4th CD, ran a very smooth meeting, even with the political theater near the end of the meeting.

Several former delegates were in attendance. As the party is always happy to welcome back old friends, a motion was passed to seat the former delegates as current delegates so they could have a say in the meeting. The delegate's first order of business (after the requisite procedural stuff) was to elect individuals for the vacant Chair and Vice Chair positions.

The new Chair of the Independence Party's 4th CD is Earl Johnson. Earl has been one of those party members who has worked tirelessly behind the scenes without ever seeking recognition for his efforts. I am excited to see him get some well deserved recognition for his work, and the opportunity to take on greater responsibility within the party. Earl seems genuinely excited about the opportunity before him.

Tom Klas, a longtime leader in the 4th CD, was elected as Vice Chair. I had the honor to serve as Tom's Vice Chair when he was Chair a couple years ago. Earl's fresh perspectives and enthusiasm in concert with Tom's years of experience will serve the district and the party well.

The Secretary position was vacated when Tom Klas, the sitting Secretary was elected Vice Chair. (I'm wondering if there is a CD 4 position that Tom hasn't served the party in.) That position is still open if there are any readers who want to have a voice in the leadership of the Independence Party's 4th CD.

I was honored to address the meeting for a few minutes to share my enthusiasm for the future of the 4th CD and my campaign. I really do believe that the district, the party and our campaign are poised for growth and success in 2010.

The meeting ended after a savvy show of political gamesmanship and a bit of political theater. Maplewood Mayor Diana Longrie and a number of her supporters attended our meeting. Several of her supporters were former IP delegates and had been seated today as current delegates. Under New Business, delegate Margaret Behrens introduced her friend, Mayor Longrie, to those in attendance and asked the Mayor to say a few words. After the Mayor's campaign speech, Margaret asked for a resolution of support for the Mayor. After some discussion to clarify that we could not "endorse" her, it was agreed that we could pass a resolution of support if a motion was made and passed by the delegates present. A motion was made and seconded. I saw this as a politically gutsy move. The political theater began when the floor was opened to questions for the Mayor. One by one, her supporters tossed out softball questions to the Mayor as if it wasn't obvious to the rest of us what was taking place. I did take the opportunity to ask her how she planned to end the acrimony between members of the Maplewood City Council. She answered by saying that she thought it was more important to identify the cause. While she made a case for what (or who) she thought was the cause, in my eyes, she did not give any plan on how to solve the problem. After one more question, the resolution of support was put to a vote. The Mayor's supporters all voted in favor of the resolution as did 2 or 3 other delegates. That brought the number of delegates in favor of the resolution to 7 out of 12 votes, and the resolution passed. I did not support the resolution for several reasons. The first reason, and the one I explained to the Mayor, was that I have not made up my mind on who I will support in the Mayor's race. Another reason is that I have very strict criteria for cross endorsing (or supporting) any candidate who is not a member of the Independence Party. She had not been vetted as to her standing on the party's platform, and I could not support the resolution for that reason.

Before this meeting, I had already seen the footage of Mayor Longrie seeking a resolution of support and then an endorsement from the DFL. She did not get either. Friends of mine in the Republican Party say that she used to be active in the party up until 2008 when she ran for the Minnesota House as a Democrat. To the best of their knowledge, she has not sought the support of the Republican Party in the current election.

I am very interested in how the Mayor will use the IP's resolution of support in her campaign. While I feel that the party was taken advantage of, I respect the fact that she pulled this off completely within the rules of the party and the meeting. The Mayor's move does show me that the Independence Party carries enough influence that a candidate from another party (whichever one that may be) would seek our support for their campaign.

Before I wrap this up, I want to send special thanks to Sally Paulson and Brian Faas from the state party Executive Committee for all of their work to make the evening a success. You two are true leaders in the party, not just by your titles, but by the example you set for others in the party. Thank you, and thanks to all of the people who attended the meeting.

Maplewood Primary Election Results

2009-09-15T23:10:00.004-05:00

Well, round one of the Maplewood city elections are done and the result appears to be 7 weeks of acrimony and vitriol. While there were a few candidates who seemed to be neutral parties to the ongoing council wars, none of them survived the first round.

For City Council:

We have 2 council candidates whose politics I don't exactly line up with and 2 council members whose political maturity I seriously question. Right now, I am leaning strongly towards voting for Kathleen Juenemann and James Llanas. While they are more willing to tax and spend than I am usually comfortable with, they are also articulate, reasoned and willing to listen to opposing viewpoints. Rebecca Cave and Dave Hafner appear to focus more on attacking the opponent than defending a reasoned policy or proposal. With Kathleen Juenemann and James Llanas placing first and second in the primary, it appears to be their race to lose in November. Unfortunately, I fear their perceived lead will only generate more attack ads and slander from Rebecca Cave and Dave Hafner.

Note: I said that I was "leaning strongly". I did not say that I had made a firm decision. If Rebecca Cave or Dave Hafner run professional, issues-based, campaigns and abandon personal attacks, I could be swayed to vote for one or both of them. Likewise, some of the Kathleen Juenemann and James Llanas joint campaign collateral was thinly veiled attack ads themselves. If either of them lowers their campaign standards much further, they too could influence a shift in my vote.

For Mayor:

Where the Council race has strong potential for controversy, the Mayor's race is guaranteed to be ugly and embarrassing for all involved. This means that I am now forced to make a choice between two exceptionally qualified and flawed candidates for Mayor.

Mayor Diana Longrie:
Before I attended my first Maplewood City Council meeting, I envisioned Mayor Longrie to be petty and amateurish. This perspective was based on media reports of Council dysfunction and her own writing in the Maplewood Monthly. After attending many city council meetings, I actually find her to be intelligent and diligent in her duties as Mayor. She is also a pro at "working a room". She tries to introduce herself to everyone in the council chambers and tries hard to make everyone feel welcome. With all of these skills, I am still disappointed that she and her supporters spend so much effort on tearing down their opponents instead of trying to sell their vision to the citizens.

Council Member Will Rossbach:
My first impression of Mr. Rossbach was an intelligent and concerned council member. We spoke at several forums that he held in Maplewood's "south leg". We didn't always agree on issues, but he listened and defended his view without attacking mine. I was also impressed with his ability to stay out of the political mudslinging that took place in several Council Member's columns in the Maplewood Monthly. He focused on topics that concerned citizens daily lives, not the political acrimony at City Hall. My attendance at City Council meetings also shed new light on Council Member Rossbach's behavior in the council chambers. I soon found Mr. Rossbach to be a bit thin skinned and quick to point out when he feels slighted by another member of the council. Now, I'm not justifying Mr. Rossbach's behavior in the chambers, but there is at least one council member and a number of citizens who seem to have made it their life's mission to make Mr. Rossbach's life a living hell. Unfortunately, it appears to be working. I think that Council Member Rossbach has been slowly dragged into the political mud by the incessant attacks he is subjected to.

With that, I can not support either candidate for Mayor at this time. I am going to wait and see which Mayoral candidate focuses on what is the right vision for Maplewood, not what is wrong with the other candidate. There is no question that Mayor Longrie has been more aggressive in her attacks on Council Member Rossbach than he has been towards her. Yet Mr. Rossbach's veiled attack ads and council chamber acrimony still exceed my comfort level. I am also worried about the direction the city will take if the entire City Council is comprised of just one political vision. I would prefer reasoned debate and discussion of multiple visions over a 4 to 0 majority. Unfortunately I don't believe the players left on the field are capable of reasoned debate or discussion with members of the "other team". Please prove me wrong or I'm thinking that my decision for Mayor may take until November.

Governor Pawlenty signs Senator Wiger's Three Strikes and You Graduate Bill.

2009-06-01T09:36:00.002-05:00

The next 5 graduating classes from Minnesota's High School's have been sent a clear message from the Governor and the Legislature: Failure IS an option. As the Star Tribune put it,

The solution passed by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Tim Pawlenty, however, could raise a few eyebrows: Students either have to pass the test once, or fail it three times, to graduate.

I have written about this specific piece of legislation several times. I continue to address it because a respected State Senator who has built his legislative reputation on the education of our students drafted the legislation. I was appalled that Senator Wiger would just suspend math testing requirements for half a decade because the test is too hard.

From my research, it sounds like there are several people who agree with the Senator that our students aren't prepared for this test. If that is the case, we need to find ways to prepare our students to succeed instead of telling them they will be allowed to fail. While I am not an expert on education, when I am elected, I will work with fellow legislators to shorten Senator Wiger's 5 year achievement gap by focusing on providing education instead of just testing it.

Update on Senator Wiger's Three Strikes and You Graduate Bill

2009-03-24T12:20:00.003-05:00

The Three Strikes bill is moving through the Senate and getting more press. Unfortunately, most people are missing a key point.

Passing the GRAD Math exam is not required to earn your diploma. In fact, the GRAD "Parents Brochure" found on the Minnesota Department of Education website list 4 ways to meet the diploma requirement:

How do students meet the graduation requirement?
There are a number of ways to meet the diploma requirement, including
• Receiving a proficient score on the MCA-II
• Receiving a passing score on the GRAD
• Receiving a Pass Individual (for students on IEP or 504 Plans)
OR
• Receiving a passing score on a GRAD retest

While the GRAD Math exam is "embedded" in the MCA-II exam, the GRAD Math is only part of the total math portion of the MCA-II. This means that a student could fall short on the GRAD math questions, but do well enough on the remaining math questions to pass the MCA-II without meeting the GRAD requirement. In that case, and this has been confirmed by the department, the student would still earn a diploma because they met one of the "4 ways to meet the diploma requirement."

Understanding this reaffirms my opposition to Senator Wiger's bill. I don't doubt that the math test may be difficult. I don't doubt that some of our students aren't prepared for the GRAD math testing. But, I actually believe that the state has adequate options for our students in this regard. Even if they fail the GRAD Math test when it is administered in their Junior year of high school, they still have 2 paths to graduation open to them. They could pass the MCA-II exam and still graduate or they can retake the GRAD math exam until they do pass it. There are several opportunities to retake, and pass, the GRAD before graduation.

The real issue that should be addressed is whether the GRAD math exam is too dificult, our math programs are too weak, or both. If the GRAD requirements are excessive, we definitely should have them reviewed and reworked. If the GRAD requirements are found to be appropriate, then we need to find ways to improve our mathematics curiculums. Lets not dismiss the importance of mathmatics proficiency while we work on the root of the problem.

Anti-bullying law introduced by Senator Wiger

2009-03-05T21:00:00.002-06:00

I want to believe that the Senators who introduced the anti-bullying bill in the Minnesota Senate are doing so out of care and concern for those students who suffer with bullying in school. It is a noble goal, but it is the wrong place for it.

In the interest of full disclosure, I was on the wrong side of bullies most of my school days. I was that kid who had to explain to my mom why my good school clothes were ruined, my broken finger, and the numerous days I was late because I had to find a creative path home to avoid the confrontations.

I beieve that bullying needs to be addressed and reduced, if not eliminated. Like most education issues though, I don't believe that our state government should be legislating school behavior. Teachers, Principals, staff and school districts need to consider bullying when they create, review and impliment their disciplinary and student safety policies every year. For the state to imply that this doesn't happen is ridiculous. Bullying isn't some new issue that requires special training to understand. To think that schools need the state to tell their staff that this is a problem and that well crafted state statutes will fix the problem is ludicrous.

After reading about the bill, I believe that the actual intent is to educate school staff on the unique issues facing students who are bullied for issues of "gender identity". While this is one reason for bullying, it is only one of many. Regardless of the reason, bullying is wrong, period.

Again, I don't believe that the state should, or honestly can, legislate tolerance for students who are already coping with the pressures of their own gender identity issues. This is an issue that should be addressed on its own merits, and not masked under the guise of bullying. This is an issue that needs to be considered by teachers, principals, staff, schools and school districts when preparing policies for an upcoming school year. But, schools shouldn't have their policies dictated by the state, and likewise, shouldn't wait for the state to tell them what issues are important, and what issues need to be addressed.

If a child is being bullied in school, parents should feel welcome to bring this issue to the school's attention. If school districts need to enact policies to improve how bullying is handled, then take the issue to the school board. My bullying issues ended in my high school principals office, not on the floor of the state capitol. This is where this issue needs to be addressed and dealt with.

$1.1 Billion for MN Schools

2009-02-20T14:23:00.002-06:00

The Minnesota Department of Education estimates that as much as $1.1 billion will be available from the federal stimulus package for Minnesota's education needs. This could be a welcome blessing for our students. Or, the politicians in Saint Paul could mess it up. Unfortunately, I fear the second result is more likely.

"We're glad to have it, but it's pretty much one-time money for ongoing needs," said Rep. Mindy Greiling, DFL-Roseville, and chairwoman of the House K-12 Finance Division. "It's a problem child, but we love all our children."

What?!? "One time money for ongoing needs"? How about one-time money for all of those one-time costs that get pushed back year after year because the budget barely pays teacher salaries, let alone staff and other ongoing expenses? I would bet that anyone who has set foot in a school within the last 5 years can name one time projects that would bring long term impact to our schools. Here is my short lists:

Update computer technology for teachers and staff to improve communications with parents and students. This could be adding text messaging to the existing automated voice notifications of truancy or schedule changes for sports teams or club activities.

Purchase new equipment for student groups (where there is a real need) like sound and lighting for theater, new van or trailer for sports teams and band equipment, a new kiln for the art department. There are a miriad of these seemingly secondary needs that could be addressed here.

Video conference equipment for colaborative learning, distance learning, community education.

The idea is that one time funding projects get pushed back time and again because there is no room in the budget. We have the money now, let's use it for all of those neglected one time costs.

Use of Deceptive Names bill

2009-02-20T11:58:00.003-06:00

I just read the Use of Deceptive Names bill that Representative Nora Slawik introduced, and that was recently defeated in committee. I fully support the goal of this bill but would recommend a little reworking of the bill to get it through committee.

The bill is intended to keep an organization from taking a name that is so close to an existing organization that it would create confusion with the public. The example often used in explaining this bill is the Maplewood Voter's Coalition. They have been around for a number of years and have supported candidates and causes. Another group with a politically polar perspective took the name Maplewood Voters. Many Maplewood citizens thought that the new messages were coming from the old group.

The goal of preventing one organization from riding the coattails of an established brand has been achieved in business. I'd be hard pressed to get away with opening Three-Em, LLC. anywhere in Minnesota, let alone the entire country. Where I think a rewrite of the bill should go is to require all political organizations (incorporated or not) to register their organizations names with the state. If an organization is going to sponsor literature, contributions, advertising, anything that publicly associates the organizations name to a message, it needs to be registered. Once registered, the organizations names need to be subject to the same legal scrutiny placed on a business.

This approach should achieve the same results as Representative Slawik's recent bill. Let me know what you think.

A proposed solution for the next close call election

2009-02-08T19:54:00.004-06:00

Let me start with the fact that my U. S. Senate candidate from Minnesota is already out of the running. I have joked with former Senator Barkley that he should step up and offer to hold the seat until the election is decided. Heck, he has more experience holding a U. S. Senate seat for 8 weeks than any one.

Now, understanding my bias, here is my proposal for future elections. The incumbent will hold the seat until the election results are finalized and a certificate of election is issued. While an election is up the air, this solution provides continuity. For as rare as these close calls are, the occasional incumbent sitting for an extra month or two would be better than an empty seat. The concern is how to legislate this. If the election is still up in the air, the incumbent hasn't really earned an election certificate. Also, the U. S. Senate can refuse to seat an unelected incumbent. These are the issues that need to be addressed in future legislation. This means that true election reform of this issue may require changes at the state and federal level.

I am surprised that this approach hasn't been taken by the Coleman camp. Of course, there is still time. This whole recount reminds me of two men fighting over who gets to keep a lost wallet full of money. I know the rules don't support it, but I sure would like to see a do over here with all of the candidates. I think Senator Barkley could gain quite a few votes in a new election.

Really, I would love to see Minnesota adopt a Fair Vote for Minnesotans with Instant Run-off Voting. It would save millions of dollars in recount expenses or the millions that the candidates in Georgia had to spend in their run-off. It would also help avoid, but not completely eliminate, the possibility of a "virtual" tie. The possibility of a tie exists in almost every election. For that reason, we need some law to ensure continued representation through the election cycle.

MN Sen. Chuck Wiger wants to gamble with our students educations

2009-02-07T21:46:00.004-06:00

Minnesota State Senator Chuck Wiger has introduced legislation that will approve video gambling machines in bars and airport terminals with a portion of the revenue going to education. I am concerned about this legislation for two reasons.

First, I acctually support legalizing some forms of gambling in the state. I also support increased funding for the education of our students. What I don't support is tying those two issues together. If the goal is to increase state sponsored gambling, I'd rather vote on that issue than tie it to some emotional heartstring yanking education plan. Minnesota has always tied gambling to emotional issues, and once approved, has just as quickly pulled the funding. Let me vote on gambling on its own merits, not some contrived emotional issue. Fortunatly, I think the Senator's goal is to increase funding for education. This is a noble and worthy goal that should not be sullied by tying it to expanded gambling. The messages that could be derived from this are scary.

Minnesota gambles on its student's education.

Students: When it comes to gambling, do as we say, not as we do.

I'm not addicted to gambling, I'm an avid financial supporter of our public schools.

The ends DO justify the means.

Last, I don't believe the Senator's bill would be the end story on gambling and educational funds. Let me explain. In 1988, 57% of Minnesotan's approved a state lottery for the bennefit of our state's "natural resources." The next legislative session, the lottery was created with a bill splitting net revenue evenly between natural resources and the eceonomic development of out-state Minnesota. One session later, in 1990, the legislature cut the out-state revenue share to 25% and the natural resources share to 40%. The resulting 35% share was allocated to the state's general fund. Today, more than 50% of net lottery revenue goes into the general fund.

How long would this law survive in-tact before a state budget crisis "requires" our legislators to make the "hard decision" to reroute these funds to the general fund?

Please don't let the state gamble with our student's education. Contact Senator Wiger and ask him to find other ways to protect education funding.

"Keep the Independence Party from ever Winning an Election Act of 2009"

2009-02-04T13:41:00.002-06:00

Bob Collins, in the Minnesota Public Radio's News Cut Blog, labeled a new bill from Minnesota Representative Kent Eken as one of "Five bills worth visiting before they die." He joked that it should be called the "Keep the Independence Party from ever Winning an Election Act of 2009." His reasoning is because the Representatives bill would require certain elected officials to receive the majority (50%+) of the vote, not just the plurality. Of course the recent, current, yet to be determined U.S. Senate race may be the motivation behind this bill. While Bob joked about it being the death knell of the Independence Party, I commented that I could actually support this measure.

The reason I don't support the bill as written is because it lacks any resolution to elections where the top vote getter does not receive the majority of the vote. That is not to say that members of the Independence Party of Minnesota are against a majority requirement for election. On the contrary, we have supported this position for years. The IP has been a strong and vocal supporter of a Fair Vote for Minnesotans. If Representative Eken will add a provision for Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) to his bill, he will see the members of the Independence Party actually rally support for this bill.

No matter where you stand on IRV, Representative Eken's bill is incomplete, and thus unworkable. If he adds IRV, or some other bridge from plurality to majority, this bill may get the support it will need to live through the session.

MN Representative Slawik thinks government can legislate better parents.

2009-02-04T12:03:00.003-06:00

Representative Slawik,

I have several concerns with this bill.

First, I understand protecting our kids, but I am not one of those that believes the government can do it better than the parents. I could see legislating a ban on youth smoking while driving, but not legislating parental responsibility.

Second, I am curious as to why you introduced this bill now. With all of the budget issues our state faces, why did you introduce such a divisive bill that will only take time, effort and attention away from the state's bigger problems.

Third, this just feels like a bill that many people will support, yet will not make it very far through the process. I'm worried that this bill is just a political tool to say that you and its other authors care for kids and its opponents don't.

Instead of legislating parental responsibility, I think it would be more productive to protect the tobacco lawsuit funds from the governor's budget proposal. Instead of penalizing poor decisions and addiction, use your legislative powers to protect the tool that has contributed to a significant decline in overall smoking, the tobacco lawsuit funds.

MN Senator Wiger introduces Three Strikes and You Graduate bill

2009-02-04T10:41:00.005-06:00

Minnesota Senator Chuck Wiger has introduced a bill (SF405) that would allow students in the classes of 2010 through 2014 to graduate even if they repeatedly fail the basic skills test. He isn't saying that students will graduate even if they fail AP Nuclear Physics. He is saying that four years of Minnesota students do not have to demonstrate Basic Skills in order to graduate. I am apalled that any state Senator would take the time and effort to legislate approved failure.

Senator, instead of a three strikes and you graduate bill, how about legislating assistance programs for those students who need it to learn the basic skills. Letting these students out of the education system without the basic skills we have promised them is the same as giving up on them. As a Minnesotan, I expect more of our education system, and of you.

Jack Uldrich for U.S. Senate

2008-07-20T16:51:00.000-05:00

I just spoke with Jack Uldrich and am proud to say that Minnesotans have a chance to vote for a smart, sensible Senator who will represent the people of the state as opposed to the just the leadership of the party. Check out his website at http://www.dotheimpossible08.com/.

It's campaign season and I have been collecting issues to write about. One is the fact that of my 5 years in the Independence Pary of Minnesota, this year represents our best chance at bridging the partisan divide with a choice of several qualified Senate candidates.

Republican Senate Leadership Survey

2006-06-21T23:13:00.000-05:00

Today I recieved a letter from Senator Elizabeth Dole. Inside was a Republican Senate Leadership Survey. I took the survey and returned it without a donation.

As regular readers (as if I can say I post regularly) know, I am an active member of the Independence Party of Minnesota. This means several things. One of those things is that I hate the growing partisanship of the Republican and Democratic parties. Another thing is that , since my party is a state level party, I rarely have a legitimate centrist to vote for in a Presidential election. It has always been a choice of the lesser of two evils. I voted for Reagan (84), Bush (88 and 92), Dole (96), Gore (00) and Kerry (08). Of all of those men, I only really believed in Bob Dole and Ronald Reagan, in that order. Of the men who failed to earn my vote, our current President is the only man to push my vote to the Democratic Party. I bring this up so that you know I am an Independent who leans to the right on my presidential ballot. I also bring this up so that you have background for the following answers to a sampling of the survey questions.

First, you should know that the survey was a gentle (ya! as if the Republican Party knew what gentle was) request for party donations. I am withholding all financial support from the Republican and Democratic parties while we build a better choice for the people of Minnesota. But, I did want to share my views with a woman I respect, Senator Dole (or the underpaid staffer who will feed my survey into a big machine). Here are some of the questions, and my real answers. In the world of check boxes, you can write a survey to get whatever answer you want. These are the answers I want the Republicans and everyone else to know.

In general, are you pleased with the job President Bush is doing? No (O.K. the check box was sufficient for this question.)

Do you agree with the liberal Democrats who want to reverse President Bush's tax cuts? No (but I do agree with the Republicans who believe that tax cuts are a good spark to a faltering economy EXCEPT when we are paying billions of dollars to finance a war. The tax cuts have caused us to borrow billions of dollars from China to fund our massive budget deficit. Sure war is expensive, and sure it may require deficit spending, but it sure as hell doesn't justify a tax credit when we can't afford to give our troops the absolute best equipment and resources available.)

Should the Republican Party push for additional tax cuts to further stimulate the economy? No (hey, another easy one.)

Do you think we should fix the federal tax code so that it is simpler and fairer? Yes (Duh, who in their right mind would say no to that question. I'm waiting to see the results of this survey say that "98% of respondents agree with the Republican Party's plan to update and revise the federal tax code." I did NOT say that.)

As the world's most powerful nation, President Bush believes that the United States has a special responsibility to help make the world more secure. Do you support President Bush's vision for protecting our nation that includes both opposing and preventing violence by terrorists and outlaw regimes, as well as fostering an era of good relations among the world's great powers? No (I'm sure that I am now in the Republican Party's database as a terrorist hugging, America hating, liberal son of a bitch. Or at least something close. The fact of the matter is that I do support the United States contributing to world security. I don't support the President shoving his vision of security down other countries throats. I do oppose terrorists and "outlaw regimes". I also oppose President Bush's selective application of this vision in some regions while he ignores the ongoing terrorism in several African nations. Finally, I do believe that the United States is a powerful nation, and that we should be fostering good relations among the world's powers. I believe that President Bush thinks that good relations only apply to a handful of nations that do as we command. We need to maintain the respect of all nations. They don't have to agree with us, but they should see us stand up for our own beliefs without us tearing theirs down. I do not believe that the United States will be able to sustain its status as the world's most powerful nation if we maintain our current international policies. We are not the richest country on earth, we do not have the largest army, and we are quickly losing our biggest asset, the world's respect. There is no power without respect.)

What further steps - if any - should we take to safeguard our homeland? Restore civil liberties and restore the freedoms we are supposed to be defending. (Benjamin Franklin once said, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.")

Do you support President Bush's "No Child Left Behind" act - which is an absolute commitment to closing the achievement gap so every child can receive a quality education and the act is producing real results for every child? No (First, that is as bad a run on sentence as I have ever seen in my own blog, and you have seen some pretty ugly ones on these pages. Second, it should be obvious that I hate children and education. Actually, I volunteered at my local public high school for a decade coaching the speech team. I love children and public education. I believe that no child should be left behind. I also believe that if the federal government is going to mandate drastic changes in our cash strapped public schools, it should also fund those changes. It is ridiculous to mandate something from the oval office, and expect the local school board to pay for it with declining enrollments and dwindling tax revenue.)

Do you believe that building the Republican Party at the local grassroots level is key to strengthening our Senate Majority from Democratic filibustering? No (I believe the person who wrote these questions should have been left behind a grade until they passed rudimentary sentence construction. I also believe that, some day, when the Republicans are the minority party in the U. S. Senate, they will be the biggest advocates of the rules that support filibustering. There is plenty of historical record of great Republican filibusters. )

On the back of the survey I wrote the following:

I am a Bob Dole Republican. "60% of something is better than 100% of nothing." When did you forget that? Members of the U. S. Senate, quit your politically motivated, real issue neglecting, bitching, and negotiate, practice diplomacy, and work for America instead of a "majority" or a "minority" leader.

Man, I miss Bob Dole. If I'm lucky, his "mini me", John McCain will survive the gaunlet of Republican partisanship (or the nominating process) and give me a real choice to vote for in 2008.

An open letter to women’s store designers

2006-06-10T21:29:00.000-05:00

Obviously, I have not written much on this site recently. I can assure you that it must be something big to compel me to break from the comfort of complacency. It is. In one way it rivals the Spanish Inquisition. It is . . . the comfy chair. O.K., so I was referring to Monty Python's Spanish Inquisition. Nonetheless, I never expect a comfy chair when I go shopping with my wife anymore. Trust me, its torture. When I go shopping with my wife, I encounter several styles of seating for the patient, bag carrying, husband or boyfriend. They range from the over-stuffed leather couch that seems to swallow you whole to the simple wooden chair that makes you long for the comfort of the folding chairs in your high school cafeteria. Unfortunately, more often than not, there is no seating and my patience is dependent on the comfort of my own two feet. If you work in women's store design, please start taking notes. If you are just another shopper's husband, know that I share your pain.

I'm not going to pretend I know why stores do or don't have seating. I've tried to figure it out, but the design, style, placement, and choice of seating are as consistent between retail chains as is the location of the men's bathroom in these same stores(There's another article idea). What I can tell you is what I would avoid and recommend if you are trying to keep a man comfortable long enough for his girlfriend or wife to buy an armful of your products.

Over-stuffed Chairs - You might as well put in a full bedroom set. These are downright sleep inducing. When I get tired, I get impatient. I would rather pace than risk snoring in public, or worse, a public drooling incident.
Couches - A big three cushion couch is acceptable if it isn't over-stuffed. If there are two or more men waiting, two men can easily share this space. Other men will have to fend for themselves. It should be noted that the male seating capacity of a couch is determined by the number of buffer cushions. There needs to be one large empty cushion between each adult male sitting on the couch, thus a three man couch will have at least five large cushions. The exception to this rule is if there is any sporting event on a TV within sight of the couch. In this case, you will find 5 men sitting on a 3 person couch. Heck, aren't the arms nothing more than elevated seats?

Love Seats - I don't care how comfortable they are, they don't belong in any women’s clothing store waiting area. A man will sit on the floor before being seen in a love seat with another man.

Wooden Chair – This may be O.K. if I need a place to sit while my wife is picking up some alterations, but it doesn’t cut it as a place of comfort. I’ll go sit in the food court if I want an uncomfortable chair.

No Seating - This is the most common, and the worst of all alternatives. Again, I’ll either pace, or try to find a clothing rack to lean on. It is not surprising, but when I’m leaning against a rack of clothes, women rarely look at the clothes on that rack. Two or three guys just hanging on your clothing racks are guaranteed to trim your sales by more than what their girlfriends are likely to buy.

So, why is a comfortable chair so important? A guy pacing around a women’s store will not only make the wife nervous, but every other woman as well. And the sleeping alternative isn’t any better, trust me, most women will leave the store before someone finds out the leaky chainsaw is with them. And, if the wife’s punch in the arm doesn’t wake the hibernating bear in the chair, you not only lose a shopper, but gain a zoo exhibit. Worst of all, if I’m not in the store when my wife walks out of the dressing room, she will wonder what I am up to. How can she focus on whether the color of the stitching on the blouse contrasts with the color of the buckle on those shoes she hasn’t worn since last spring? For all she knows my male urges could be leading me into trouble without her, like the Bose store, or Apple, or any other overpriced electronics shop in the mall.

Do you want to increase sales this year? Just put in a couple comfy chairs for the retail husbands who accompany your customers. We don’t care about the color of the chair, or the embellishments on it. We expect "frou frou" furniture in a women’s store. Just make it comfortable.

Before I wrap this up, I have a confession to make. Women’s stores have driven me to become a gadget geek. It’s true. I was about to go insane reading Vogue, Glamour, and Cosmo every weekend while my wife was trying on clothes. I found my salvation when I realized that I could play a game on my PDA, or read the news on my cell phone. For those who have not found their refuge in technology, stores should consider putting out a Sports Illustrated, Time Magazine, or even GQ on the reading stack. Hey, I've got to go, my wife just finished paying for her outfits, and I haven't even finished . . .

THIS is why I'm a member of the Independence Party of Minnesota!

2005-07-30T22:30:00.000-05:00

John Deeth Blog - CAFTA Aftermath

The Democrats are considering punishing House members who did not vote the party line on CAFTA. These Representatives may lose their committee assignments because their conscience, or maybe even their constituents, were more important to them that the position dictated from the party leadership.

THIS is why I have given up on the 2 major parties. How can an elected official be the voice of their fellow citizens, their constituents, when the party is standing by to muzzle that voice if it dissents from the party platform. More importantly, how can a voter believe that a candidate has their best interest at heart when the party's interest is the only one that will get them on the important committees, and get them the important dollar necessary to run for the job again.

The longer I look at the political landscape, the more I realize that a vote for a Republican or Democratic candidate is a vote for the party's agenda, and a pawn for the party's leadership. John has blogged several times about how politicians will throw in a dissenting vote when the outcome is certain in their favor. As long as the party position is certain to win, they will take the renegade posture to impress the voters at home. But if the party loses the vote, whoa unto the dissenters, far better they had never run than to face the retribution of the caucus. Even if the voters take favor on the dissenting candidate for their brave stance, they will have a hard time voting for them next term when the party throws it's own favor to a new candidate. Sure, the rookie candidate will have energy and enthusiasm and will promise that things will be different when they get into office. They will represent the people. They will fight for your interest. They will grovel for the campaign cash, or get the same bum's rush the voice of dissention got.

If you firmly believe in the majority of a given party's platform, by all means, vote for that party's candidates.

If, on the other hand, you fall into the vast majority of voters whose positions cross party lines, or at least are a bit more moderate than the party leadership, then you need to know that there are alternatives to the two sides of the political spectrum. Like your visual spectrum, the extremes are Black and White, but the majority of what you see is a cavalcade of colors. This election cycle, look at all of the colors and all of the choices you have to choose from.

Some people think that third-party votes are "wasted votes". If you vote for a major party candidate because you think that they will listen to you, that is a wasted vote. The Democrats have illustrated that point in the linked blog.

The World's Most Exclusive Club

2005-05-24T21:38:00.000-05:00

Senate filibuster showdown averted / COMPROMISE: 14 senators craft agreement to allow vote on some judicial nominees

It is said that the U. S. Senate is the World's most exclusive club. Yesterday we found out that the most exclusive club may consist of Senators, but not all 100 are members. I believe that the most exclusive club is the 14 Senators who exercised common sense in the face of tremendous pressure from their own "leadership". It appears that there are too many Senators who for one reason (extreme ideology) or another (fear of party retribution) felt it was better to ride the party line to a nuclear disaster rather than explore compromise. What really bothers me is the "leadership's" response to the progress made by the "gang of 14". Not only did the "leadership" not contribute to the compromise, they failed to support it after it was reached. Now, here is where I should rail against the 86 Senators who either drove the Senate to the precipice, or sat back and waited for impact. I won't be that cliche.

If you read the media coverage, the real leadership of the senate is obvious. The leaders are Mr. Perkins (Family Research Council) and Mr. Neas (People for the American Way). These two have both gone as far as to insinuate that the voters will retaliate at the polls over this compromise. READ: The voter's on our mailing list, phone lists, and e-mail lists. I hope there is retribution. I just hope that 86 people are nervous, and not the 14 people who thought about the country above their radical party contributors.

Another group that needs to be chastised here is the media. What the heck are they doing giving inches and inches of column space, or minutes and minutes of air time to the opinions of these extremist organizations. Except for one or two lines of poll results, I have seen nothing that addresses the public's feelings on this. I am glad that Mr. Perkins of the Family Research Council has an opinion, and I'm glad he has the right to share it. Now, give me a quote from Joe Voter in Stearns County, Minnesota. I just wish Joe Voter's 1 vote carried as much weight as Mr. Perkins. The only way we are going to bring these votes into balance is to listen as closely to Mr. Perkins as we listen to Joe Voter. It would be even better if we listened as much to Joe Voter as we do to Mr. Perkins. The point is we need to listen to both of them in equal measure.

CALL TO ACTION: Where were your Senators Monday night? If they weren't in Senator McCain's office practicing statesmanship and dealing with the hard issues of the people's business, help find them other, more suitable, employment the next time they re-apply to you for their job. If they were cowering behind the party banner instead of carrying it into the battle of negotiations and compromise, send them home when their tour is up.

Minnesota, it seems that Senator Coleman is comfortable as President Bush's and the radical Republican's lap dog. He did some great things for Saint Paul, and I'm thankful for that. I'm afraid that he is so close to the President that if you pulled them apart, Senator Coleman would need a skin graft. As for Senator Dayton, he is already playing the role of lame duck. It's unfortunate that the fire that won him this seat burned out so shortly after he took it.

In 2006, please seek out and support a Senate candidate that would be welcome in Senator McCain's office. Put your support and your vote with a candidate who listens more to you than he or she does to Mr. Perkins or Mr. Naes.

Politics in Stereophonic Sound

2005-01-11T21:13:00.000-06:00

I don't know what I was doing when this first aired, but today I was blessed with one of the finest pieces of reality TV I have ever seen. Now mind you, I'm not talking about the Bachelorette, or Donald Trump. I'm talking about Crossfire. Whooaa, I know, as does Jon Stewart, that there is very little reality on this show. At some point during the election, Jon had the balls to try and let them know that. I saw the footage earlier tonight, and it was the first time I have ever seen reality on a Left versus Right "talk show". You should watch this on iFilm. So much for the inspiration of this rant.

One of the points that became crystal clear from Jon's indictment of Crossfire was the stereophonic realities of our political system and many of those who "cover it". Our government, our political system, is like my parents old Magnavox console stereo playing those "Extra Wide Stereo" vinyl records. "Extra Wide Stereo" was supposed to mean that the record had a wide frequency response. In reality, it sounded like half of the band was way over to my right, and the other half was way over to the left. Thus the analogy to the Liberal versus Conservative hack shows. Every time I have watched one of these shows, I have been amazed at how extreme their guests are. I honestly saw one of these shows pit not one, but two atheists against Oliver North. The topic? Is the separation of church and state threatened when a teacher reads historical documents to his public school class that contain the word God? The atheists had the gall to contend that their rights were impinged by the teacher reading the Declaration of Independence where the words "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights." The teacher didn't write those words, our Founding Fathers did. You may not agree with the language, but you can't bury history because you don't like the phrasing. On the other hand, Olly tried to contend that the Founding Fathers meant for our country to be a Christian land, and that even though the Constitution does not mention God or religion anywhere in the body of the document, the use of the word "blessings" is blatant evidence of our Founding Father's Christian intent for this country. Olly may honestly believe that Jews, Muslims and American Indians would not be welcomed by our Founding Fathers, and therefore should be converted, or deported by a good Christian country like our own, but my belief is that both extremes need to Get Real!

I want to see these shows take two people out of the audience, the phone book, even the grocery store, and have them discuss their perceptions of the issues that matter most to them. It might be religion in schools or it might be the lack of a good ball diamond in their neighborhood. It might be controversial, but I would rather watch real people discuss issues that interest them, than listen to two extremists try to out extreme each other. The Crossfire guys tried to claim that they were a debate show. I was a debater. The first rule of debate is that the topic must be one where the audience members can be persuaded to shift, or even change their position. This is not happening on these shows, or in our two party system of government. Uncle Sam is playing the issues "Extra Wide."

What this country needs is an audio shift into the 21st Century. It's time for surround sound. I've said it before, and I'll say it again, there are more than two sides to every issue. I not only want to hear them, I love to hear them. Give me a deep rich bass for rhythm. Let's hear some crisp brass sounds flutter out of the tweeters. Mix in a dozen more instruments to fill out the body of the piece. There is nothing like the big sounds of a Big Band. The key is to listen to the whole sound, not just one speaker. If you sit too close to the sub-woofer, your only going to hear the bass. If you sit too close to the rear speakers, you'll miss the movement of the sounds as they are transported across the room. If you listen only to the Left, you'll miss the cries for morality in society. If you listen only to the right, you'll miss the cries for morality in business and nature.

I don't know how many countries have a government thriving on a duopoly of party power. I do know of several countries that are thriving, or at least built on multi-party systems, Britain, Israel, Afghanistan, and soon, Iraq. How can we build a democracy in another country around a multi-party system, and then close our eye's to the danger's of our lack of one.

Watch Jon's appearance on Crossfire, then heed his plea. Don't let these "Extreme Makeover, Government Edition" shows mis-direct you from the reality of our society and our government, we aren't as far apart on the issues as a society, as the pundits and election experts (sic) would like you to believe.

It would be appropriate for me to go play a little Aaron Copland in surround sound, but since I got out of bed at about 12:30 am to get these thoughts "on paper", I'll have to dream about the richness of a Fanfare For The Common Man, and thank Jon for being uncommon.

My First Quixotic Blog

2004-12-31T09:16:00.000-06:00

I have a friend who has been blogging for years. His subject matter runs from Iowa's smallest farm to the Green Bay Packers. Being an Iowa Democrat, the majority of his blog is focused on politics. Now, I have watched John's political journey take him from hanging a Soviet flag in our college house; through PAC work in Washington, D.C.; past a couple noble, but failed, candidacies; to local election guru. Through the years, I've witnessed his perspective become more and more mainstream. That being said, his ideology has been, is, and always will be "left of the dial." It really is political growth without compromise. For this, I admire the man immensely.

Now let me put that praise into perspective. I am known in John's circles as "his Republican friend." Truth be told, I am growing more and more apprehensive of that title. Nothing will change my pride in the friend title, but President Bush sure is battering my pride in the Republican label. I actually caucused for my first time this past election cycle. I was even a delegate at the state convention . . . for the Independence Party of Minnesota. This is where the title of my blog comes in.

According to the dictionary, quixotic is defined as "idealistic without regard to practicality." That about sums up my political ideology. I believe strongly in the pillars of Republicanism (small central government, support business, state's rights, etc.), but I can't cow-tow to a party that is pandering to it's conservitive right wing at the cost of it's principles. Many people have told me that my 3rd party stand is impractical. I know that, and I'm constantly torn between a major party who claims to represent my interest and a 3rd party that comes much closer to actually doing so.

How can Republicans claim to defend state's rights when they force No Child Left Behind down their throats, and don't even give them the fuding to help wash it down. How can they preach a smaller federal government and add new departments everytime they don't like the way the responsible department handles something. It's a lot like welding a refrigerator door to a Hummer with bad armour. Just fix the original problem instead of piling one on top of another.

Anyway, I'll try not to rant to much in my first blog, there will be plenty of opportunity to do that later. Here is where you come in. My political journey is stalled. I don't like where the Interstates (major parties) take me, and I can't see that the side roads (3rd parties) can get me where I want to go. One thing I do know, trust, and value is honest discourse of the issues (I told you I was quixotic!). My opinions and rants are merely one side of many to the issues I will address. The more views we can uncover here, the more realistic this blog can become. Don't let politics on my site, in your country, or even your neighborhood, remain one, or even 2 sided. I like to think of issues as multi-faceted. The more sides we expose, the more interesting the issue becomes, and the more we can understand the issue from many perspectives.

I admire my friend John, although I don't always agree with him. His Blog is linked here so that many of the issues I cover have at least 2 views. Please add your views as well.