Naming The Vikings Stadium

Posted on by

And what shall we name our new little crown jewel?  No, I’m not talking about His Royal Highness Prince George Alexander Louis of Cambridge.  I’m talking about the long-gestating  stadium of Minneapolis, formerly known as Mall of America Field, formerly known as the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome.

The stakes for this little name game are high.  The owners of the San Francisco 49ers recently negotiated a stadium naming rights deal worth $220 million over 20 years with Levi Strauss, an obscure little brand desperate to buy itself some name recognition.  Vikings owner Zygi Wilf hopes to secure a cool $10 to $15 million per year off of naming rights of the new stadium.

The Wilfs have hired a firm to handle this task in Minnesota, Van Wagner Sports and Entertainment.  The naming guru at Van Wagner, Jeff Wagner, gave us “Target Center” a few years back.

But I am willing to offer my services for free.  After much research, here is my detailed analysis:

U.S. Bank Stadium.  This is the front-runner, because U.S. Bancorp is local, and because financial institutions are big into the stadium naming game these days.

  • Pro:  They’re sitting on lots of money and not lending much, so why not buy yourself a vanity plate?
  • Con:  Brand confusion.  Another crappy football team already has “The Bank” on the east bank, so adding a second “The Bank” branch on the west bank just would make everyone’s heads hurt.

Land O Lakes Stadium.  It would make a lot of sense for our local dairy food processor to want to put its name on the asymmetrical building that looks like a half eaten block of butter.

  • Pro:  Sounds like a melodic description of the Vikings’ beautiful home state, not like just another corporate commercial.
  • Cons:    Our neighboring rivals may have the corner on all dairy-related branding.

Wheaties Stadium.  If General Mills wants in, I hope they lead with their top sports-related brand rather than the parent company brand.

  • Pro:  “Wheaties” connotes “champions,” our aspiration.
  • Con:  “Wheaties” connotes “champions,” which would bring immediate false advertising charges.

3M Stadium.  3M, formerly known as Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, is an iconic Minnesota company that produces world famous products such as PostIt Notes.

  • Pro:  Ultra-compact two-letter name dramatically saves on signage costs.
  • Con:  Sets up endless hilarious post-game punchlines for our beloved Wisconsin friends:  “You know what the three “m’s” in 3M Stadium really stands for, don’t you?”

Matt’s Bar Stadium.  If we must have a stadium named after a business, why not one that Minnesotans actually like, such as the loveable home of the Juicy Lucy in south Minneapolis.

  • Con:  They may not have quite as much money as U.S. Bank to pony up.
  • Pro:   It would be a homage to small businesses, which quietly account for half of Minnesota’s private sector jobs, while remaining “small enough to fail” without need of taxpayer bailouts.

OmniSynCorp Stadium.  OmniSynCorp is a little known start-up company that spent all its seed capital on hiring a corporate naming firm that now badly wants to see its name in lights.

  • Con: Promoting a business that will be in Chapter 11 in a few months may ultimately reflect poorly on the home team’s brand.
  • Pro:   The corporate naming firm promises that the corporations’ bleeding edge brand represents “an iconic homage to the game-changing synergistic synergy imbedded in our value-added values.”

Target Stadium.  I mean, why not?  We already have Target Center, Target Field, the Target Public School system, and Target Politicians.

  • Con:  It’s unfair to poor Walmart.
  • Pro:  It’s the soothing symmetry that only monopolies can offer.

People’s Stadium.  Governor Dayton famously promised us this would be a “people’s stadium,” not just the Vikings’ stadium, which persuaded the people of Minnesota to put up a half-billion dollars to pay for the joint.

  • Con:  It’s vaguely Soviet.
  • Pro:  Justice.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was also featured as a “best of the best” by MinnPost Blog Cabin.

Why Don Shelby Will Never Run For Congress

Posted on by

Do not, repeat, do not believe the “Don Shelby Mulling a Run for Congress” hype.  Political reporters, bored with their jobs in the dog days of a non-election year, desperately want Shelby to run against the ever-bland Erik Paulsen.  But it’s not going to happen.

Anchors like Shelby need to be the center of attention, with a battery of cameras forever trained on their every move.  Being in a body of 435 egomaniacs leaves one obscure.  Our local version of The Donald does not do obscure.

Anchors need to be in control, with entire newsroom staffs at their beck-and-call.    Being the most junior member in a seniority bound institution leaves one a pawn.  King Don does not play the pawn.

Anchors need to feel above-the-fray of distasteful partisan politics, forever avoiding even a hint of controversy. But in Congress one is forced off the fence to vote on the most contentious issues of the day, and one’s hair gets mussed in the ensuing scuffles.  And above all else, Dandy Don does not do mussed hair.

If Shelby runs for Congress, it will be because he is in denial about these realities, and denial is certainly a possibility for the humility-challenged amongst us.  Shelby adores the current attention from political reporters, but he does not appear to be a stupid man.  There is no way he will give up his elder statesman role on WCCO-TV and the rubber chicken circuit for the rough and tumble of partisan politics.  He does seem to sincerely care about environmental issues, but not as much as he cares about preserving his local image as a legendary newsman.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was also featured as a Best of the Blogs by Politics in Minnesota.

End State Senate Confirmation Authority

Posted on by

In a State Capitol environment rife with puerile debates, the most inane are those associated with confirmation of gubernatorial nominations to cabinet posts.

The State Senate pours too much blood, sweat, tears and time into confirmations. DFLers especially have used confirmations as a partisan bludgeon, rejecting Chris Georgacus in 1997, Steve Minn in 2000 (twice), Cheri Pierson Yecke in 2000, and Carol Molnau in 2008.   Republicans haven’t blocked as many because they have held the Governor’s office for so long, but they did return the favor in 2012 by rejecting DFLer Ellen Anderson.

These tit-for-tat games are a waste of time and largely inconsequential.  Usually, the nominees are just toyed with before being approved, but the toying itself expends too much legislative time and goodwill.  Even in the relatively rare instance when a nominee is rejected – usually due to political score-settling rather than the nominee being unqualified or corrupt — the Governor simply puts forward a new nominee who has the same basic policy positions as the rejected nominee.  The scene resembles a dog chasing its tail.

These confirmation debates represent the worst kind of scab picking in an institution that needs to heal key relationships in order to make more consequential policymaking possible.  Picked scabs leave lasting pain and scars that impact the long-term ability of our state government to reach constructive compromises.

In an era when the executive branch and legislative branch vigorously compete against each other like the Minnesota Vikings and the Green Bay Packers, the legislative confirmation authority is the functional equivalent of  the Packers possessing veto authority over which players the Vikings may have on their team.  A Governor from any party should be able to choose his own team, and immediately put them on the field without waiting for the approval from the other team.

So I have a simple reform proposal:  Stop it.  Stop requiring legislative approval of the Governor’s cabinet members.  Just stop it.

I know the confirmation requirement is traditional and legally mandated, but laws and traditions can be changed.  Minnesota’s future success is not dependent on the continuation of the confirmation process, but it is dependent on legislators not clawing each others eyes out over issues that simply don’t matter that much.

I did take a civics class a long time ago, so I realize there is a downside of this.  An imprudent Governor could choose a nominee who is grossly incompetent, inexperienced, and/or unethical.  That can happen.

But when it does happen, legislators have the ability to expose the Governor’s flawed nominee in the news media and campaigns, and let voters decide whether the nomination bothers them enough to take it out on the Governor and his party at the ballot box.  Yes, legislative confirmations are a check on gubernatorial power.  But two checks on gubernatorial nominations already exist – freedom of speech and elections.  The third check – Senate confirmation votes — just isn’t needed.

Whatever small benefits confirmations may have are dwarfed by the substantial wear and tear they put on policymaker relationships.  Ending gubernatorial nomination confirmations certainly won’t stop bloodshed at the Capitol.  But it will stop one of the more trifling reasons for bloodshed.

– Loveland

Note:  This post was also featured by MinnPost Blog Cabin and Politics in Minnesota’s “Best of the Blogs.”

Rep. Kline To Be Deported By Immigration Reform-Supporting Minnesotans?

Posted on by

A new Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey finds that Minnesota Congressman John Kline could be deported from Congress by Minnesotans if he and his Republican caucus continue to obstruct the immigration reform package recently passed by the U.S. Senate.

Almost 7 out of every 10 (69%) Minnesota voters living in Kline’s congressional district support the immigration reform proposal.  By more than a 2-to-1 margin, those Minnesotans say Klein’s blocking of this set of reforms would make them less likely to support him in his upcoming reelection bid (44% less likely to support Kline if he opposes immigration reform versus 19% more likely to support him).

PPP surveyed a representative sample of Americans in seven congressional districts, including districts in California, Colorado, Nevada, and New York.   Among those seven districts, the support for the package was strongest in the Minnesota 2nd congressional district that Kline currently represents.

– Loveland

Political Cliches on Amobarital

Posted on by

I suppose it’s a cliché to point out that politicians speak in  clichés.   Their wall-to-wall use of bromides to mask deeper political truths has made political news conferences and speeches a rhetorical wasteland.  Everyone can finish the sentences of the politician speaking:

“We must grow the _______.”

“We must invest in the _____.”

“Our greatest natural resource is our ______.”

“Economy,” “future” and “people/children,” right?  No wonder the masses only perk up for scandals.  They spice up an  utterly predictable political discourse.

To cut through the cliches and learn what politicians really think, what if we snuck a little amobarbital — sometimes used as a “truth serum” to obtain information from those who are unable or unwilling to tell the truth — into the water bottles at the podium of State Capitol news conferences? The first sentence or two would be the predictable, carefully focus-grouped political clichés.  But then, bam, it’s amobarital time, baby!

“It’s time for the Legislature to do what ordinary Minnesota families do when they encounter difficult financial times.  Mom and dad gather around the kitchen table, they thoughtfully review their household finances, and they have tough conversations about how they could cut the family budget to make ends meet.

(Amobarital kicks in)

But then most of those dads and moms say “screw it” and run up their high interest credit cards instead.   After all, that’s why the Federal Reserve reports that consumer debt is at an all time high of $2.75 TRILLION.  So whatever the Legislature does, it should not, I repeat, NOT act like those ordinary Minnesota moms and dads grappling with their financial future at the good old kitchen table.”

For the record, State Capitol Police Force, I understand that drugging elected officials would be an ill-advised and felonious act that I am not seriously contemplating or encouraging.  But a boy can dream, can’t he?

– Loveland

America Has Gotten Much Better Since 1776, Not Worse

Posted on by

The other day when listening to sports talk radio I was treated to Original Mattress Factory CEO and pitch man Ron Trzcinski wishing me a Happy Independence Day.  In his most recent commercial radio ad, Trzcinksi gets off his box spring and on to his soapbox:

“This is Ron Trzcinski.  Our founders intended this country to be one of limited power, created expressly to protect our rights. As time has progressed, however, it has become less limited in scope and our rights less secure.”

This assertion, the same used by Tea Party activists these days, is softer than one of Mr. Trzcinski’s premium mattresses.  Lets get real, Ron.  If you are an American woman, racial minority, religious minority, or gay person, your rights are much more secure now than they were in colonial times.   Quaint little colonial customs like slavery, hanging for sodomy and Native American genocide are, thank goodness, things of the past.  For the most part, state and federal laws no longer treat American women like legal incompetents, akin to children and criminals.  States like Massachusetts no longer ban  non-Christians from holding office, or require Catholic officeholders to formally renounce papal authority.

Does Mr. Trzcinski really want to take us back to those “good old days?”  The truth is, the rights of Americans are much more secure than they were in colonial times.

As for Trzcinksi’s point about limited government, it is true that the United States has more government than it did in the colonial times, just as every industrialized nation on the planet does.  The American government that American citizens have freely chosen, via their representative democracy, has given us dramatically better education, health care, water, homes, national security, food, working conditions, environment, medical research, consumer protection, police and fire protection and a myriad of other things most colonial citizens lacked.  That’s why polls continually show that Americans want more government services, not less.

Does Mr. Trzcinski really want America to take us back to those days of bare bones government?

Rather than comparing the governments of two vastly different historic eras –colonial America versus contemporary America — it is much more sensible to compare the United States with other contemporary industrialized societies.  Making that comparison, it becomes clear that America still has very limited government.  When you look at government revenue as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), Americans pay 27% (includes state, local and federal taxes combined), according to the conservative Heritage Foundation.  (It should be noted that a sizable portion of that 27% is used to fund the largest military and counter-terrorism initiative in the world, a heavy burden that other nations don’t bear. )  Americans’ tax bill is much less than the 29% paid by Mexicans, the 31% paid by Irish and Australians, the 32% paid by Canadians, the 34% paid by Poles, the 35% paid by Brazilians, the 39% paid by British,  the 41% paid by Germans, the 44% paid by Norwegians, the 44% paid by Fins, the 45% paid by the French, or the 46% paid by the Swedes.

It simply is not true that since colonial times Americans have been losing all of their rights and being overrun by a vast government.  America accomplished truly great things on July 4, 1776 that are well worth celebrating.  But we need to celebrate the truth of 1776, not the delusional Tea Party spin.  Most importantly, we need to celebrate how much more true America has gotten to its Declaration of Independence values over the past 237 years.

– Loveland

 

DisHonourable

Posted on by

Minnesota GOP gubernatorial candidate Scott Honour has a surname that sounds as if it was fabricated by a team of political consultants.  What, “Bob Dignity” wasn’t available to run for governor?

I don’t know a lot about Mr. Honour’s pre-political life, but from what he has published on his website biography, he sounds like a pleasant chap and a capable business person.

But so far, his performance since becoming a politician does not live up to the expectations set by his surname.

Mr. Honour has been busy making the case that Minnesota state government spending is out-of-control.  For instance, this campaign video claims:

“Did you know that our state is spending over twice as much per citizen as when I graduated from high school in 1984?  It sure doesn’t feel like we’re getting twice as much value for our money.”

That’s a potent political statement.  But is it an honorable statement?  A truly honorable leader would acknowledge that the median household income when Mr. Honour graduated from high school in 1984 was $22,415.00, while in February 2013 median household income had grown to $51,404, more than twice as high as it was in 1984.

As a successful businessperson, Mr. Honour surely understands that as household incomes have more than doubled between 1984 and 2013, the cost of just about everything else, including the major things government has to purchase – medical care, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, energy, asphalt, private and public sarlaries, technology, real estate, construction materials, etc. — have also gotten dramatically more expensive.  He is a bright and experienced enough businessperson to understand that economic reality, but he is not honorable enough to publicly acknowledge it.

So what’s the truth about state government spending in Minnesota.  A thoughtful and thorough Minnesota 2020 analysis recently found:

Adjusted for inflation, accounting shifts, state takeovers, and the tobacco bond sale, Minnesota is spending about $5.2 billion less (in 2012-13 dollars) than it was a decade ago. That’s roughly $730 less per capita, or an 18 percent decline in state expenditures.

Claims of rapid state spending growth are based on comparisons that fail to account for inflation, population, school funding shifts, and other one-time events that distort spending over time.

If legislature implements Governor Dayton’s current budget plan, by FY 2016-17 Minnesota’s adjusted per capita spending would still be $500 less than it was a decade ago (FY 2002-03).

Continue reading →

5 Reasons the DFL Will Hold Their Ground in 2014

Posted on by

Yesterday, I made the case for why the DFL may lose ground in 2014.   For my DFL friends who are now out on the ledge staring into the inky abyss, here are five reasons to not jump.  Yet.

DFL Has A Broader Base.  Minnesota is a fairly solid blue state these days.  According a recent Public Policy Polling survey, there are significantly more Minnesotans who say they are Democrats (38%) than Republicans (27%).  That’s a big reason why the polls show that DFL state legislators have a significantly better, though not good, approval rating (36% approve) than Republican state legislators (23% approve).  It also probably explains why the DFL starts the campaign season ahead in generic head-to-head races, with a generic DFL candidate preferred by a six point margin (47% for the generic DFLer and 41% for the generic Republican).   Again,  the DFL’s seasonal voters have to be energized get off the proverbial couch to vote in a non-presidential year, but an average DFL legislative candidates does start the race with a significantly broader base than their Republican opponents.  That’s a big deal. Continue reading →

5 Reasons the DFL Will Lose Ground in 2014

Posted on by

Will the DFL lose ground in state legislative elections in 2014?  Following the 2013 legislative session, there are a lot of things swirling around  suggesting that they might.  In no particular order, here are five things to watch:

Freshman Frailty.  Newly elected DFL freshman won in lots of places in 2012 where they were not expected to win.  There was a good reason why they were not expected to win.  Many of these are difficult districts for DFLers to hang onto under the best of circumstances, and the circumstances will be more difficult than they were in 2012 (see below).  That could make many in this large freshman class of DFLers one hit wonders. Continue reading →

Legislators Defending Gay Marriage Vote Should Ask “What Would Wellstone Do?”

Posted on by

If I was a DFL state legislator in St. Paul or Minneapolis who supports gay marriage, I’d be elated about today’s Star Tribune Minnesota Poll showing 46% of Minnesotans agreeing with “the Legislature’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage.”  After all, two-thirds (66% agree) of residents of Hennepin and Ramsey Counties and even more DFLers (78% agree) are on my side.

But if the majority of my constituents were outside of those core Twin Cities counties  (only 37% agree), over 35 years old (only 41% agree) or earning under $50,000 per year (only 37% agree), I’d be on edge.

A lot of newly elected DFL freshman are in this position.  If I were them, I would be thinking WWWD – What Would Wellstone Do?

The late Senator Paul Wellstone was much more liberal than the majority of his constituents, just as DFLers in Greater Minnesota are on this issue.  Still, Wellstone was widely respected, even by those who disagreed with him, in large part because he was proactive, sincere, respectful, civil, unapologetic and direct about his disagreements with constituents.  When explaining differences, he made values-driven arguments, not politics-driven arguments. Continue reading →

Minnesotans Support Tax Increases, BUT…

Posted on by

That stale breeze you detect when driving down John Ireland Boulevard this morning is a result of taut DFL legislators exhaling en masse as they cuddle up with today’s Star Tribune Minnesota Poll finding that 58% of Minnesotans support their $2 billion tax increase on top wage earners, while 64% support their $1.60 per pack cigarette tax increase.

“Some New Taxes” Beats “No New Taxes”

Republicans and their well-funded special interest backers have spent decades aggressively pushing “no new taxes” messaging to Minnesotans, almost to the exclusion of all other economic issues.  This survey shows that Minnesotans just aren’t buying it.   It shows that  “some new taxes” is a message that sells pretty well with Minnesotans.  It also shows that DFLers, after flirting with scores of potential tax increases during the 2013 session, finally settled on two politically palatable taxes.  So, there’s a lot of good news for DFLers in these findings. Continue reading →

South Dakota Guv’s Fiscal Race-to-the Bottom Not A Selling Point for Minnesotans With Dakota Roots

Posted on by

Dear South Dakota Governor Dennis Daugaard:

I’ve been pondering your recent “Dakota Roots” visits to Minnesota’s Mall of America to recruit South Dakota expatriates to return to their native state to strengthen South Dakota’s economy.    As the Star Tribune explains:

Dakota Roots was first launched under Daugaard’s predecessor (Republican Governor Mike Rounds) to address the state’s vexing problem. South Dakota needs more workers to take full advantage of its low unemployment rate (4.3 percent) and 10,000 unfilled jobs statewide, according to the governor’s staff.

As the name suggests, Dakota Roots is designed to lure people who perhaps grew up in South Dakota and had moved away, or went to college there, or had parents or grandparents from the state.

As a native South Dakotan living in the Twin Cities, I’ve been giving your pitch some thought.  There’s a lot of what you are selling that is attractive to me.  I have treasured family and friends in South Dakota.  I miss the expansive prairie skies framing breathtakingly beautiful fields of sunflowers or bison.  I love many of the changes that have happened since I left Sioux Falls about 30 years ago, such as the Washington Pavillion, Parker’s Bistro, Josiah’s Coffee, Spezia, Zanbroz and the rejuvenated Falls Park.  I admire the populist spirit of South Dakotans, and the pride they have in a place and culture that too few Americans have taken the time to understand and appreciate. Continue reading →

Will Target Put Emmer Back In Its Shopping Cart?

Posted on by

Talk radio pundit and former state legislator Tom Emmer is running to become the new Michele Bachmann.  He fits the part.  Remember, this is the guy who sponsored a “nullification” amendment to the Minnesota Constitution that says Minnesota won’t obey any American laws – civil rights protections, interstate commerce rules, banning of health insurance pre-existing condition limitations, etc. – unless the Minnesota Legislature agrees to do so by a two-thirds majority, a threshold that in recent times has proven to be nearly unattainable.

In other words, Mr. Emmer wants to go to Washington to set federal laws, which he wants Minnesotans to ignore.  It makes perfect sense.

If Mr. Emmer can win the GOP nomination, he will become the new Michele, since Bachmann’s district has been custom gerrymandered for GOP domination.  There won’t be a lot of suspense in that general election contest.

But one interesting question that remains is whether Minnesota-based Target Corporation will again back Emmer, and his anti-choice, anti-fair wage, anti-gay rights, anti-tax, anti-contraceptive, and pro-nullification ways.

To be fair, an  Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel vigorously defended its 2010 backing of Emmer by insisting that he was merely purchasing the anti-tax and anti-fair wage portion of Emmer, not the anti-choice, anti-gay rights, anti-contraceptive, pro-nullification portion of him.

Continue reading →

MN Teachers: 17% of Teachers Are “Ineffective.” MN Legislature: You’re Stuck With Them.

Posted on by

As schools adjourn for the summer, I was struck by a survey of Minnesota teachers recently released by the education reform group MinnCAN.  There are a number of fascinating things about it, but I’m most interested in a number that is getting very little attention.

                                    Younger Teachers Oppose LIFO

The more heavily publicized aspect of the poll has been about young teachers’ opinions on layoff rules.  There has been quite a hullabaloo over efforts in the Minnesota Legislature to change teacher layoff rules.  Currently, when school districts are deciding which teachers get laid off during difficult times, they can only consider seniority.  They can’t consider teacher input, parental input, principal input, relative improvement on test scores, or what an individual school needs at the moment.  Minnesota is one of just 12 states in the nation where seniority alone — last in, first out (LIFO) — drives such decisions. Continue reading →

Franken Challenger Bachmannesque On Announcement Day

Posted on by

We have a fresh new face on the political scene!  Lazard Middle Market co-CEO Mike McFadden announced yesterday that he is running against freshman incumbent Al Franken to represent Minnesota in the U.S. Senate.

In day one of the post-Bachmann era, the Republicans are finally ready to leave behind Bachmann’s record-setting number of disgraceful Pants-on-Fire ratings from the non-partisan fact-checking organization, PolitiFact.

Surely a guy who does financial asset management for a living will be especially accurate when it comes to fiscal policy.  Indeed, yesterday CEO Mike came out with his HP 12C finance calculator a blazin.’ Continue reading →

Wry Wing Puppetry

Posted on by

December 17, 2013 Wry Wing Politics Post

Maybe legislators could authorize some kind of independent Legislative Salary Commission to set salaries.  The Commission could be appointed by the Governor, to insulate legislators from public blame for subsequent salary increases.

May 28, 2013 Star Tribune Editorial

The (constitutional) amendment (about legislative compensation that the 2013 Legislature sent to the 2016 ballot) would hand responsibility for setting legislative pay to a commission — appointed by the governor and chief justice of the Supreme Court — on which no legislator, former legislator, lobbyist or former lobbyist could serve. Appointees would be evenly split between the two largest political parties at the Legislature.  The amendment offers no guarantee of a pay raise. The proposed commission would be as free to cut pay as to increase it.

I’m going to take a nap now.  Being ominpotent can be exhausting.

Loveland

Moderate Middle Copping Out About 2013 Session

Posted on by

With Republicans trained like parrots to repeat the word “overreach” and DFLers repeating the word “progress,” political reporters are reporting that the public is giving the session “mixed reviews.”

As far as the 2014 state legislative elections are concerned, that leaves things in the hands of swing voters.   What staunch partisans on both sides conclude about the 2013 session is not particularly important, because those activists were never likely to change their minds between now and November 2014.  They are not the biggest electoral variables. Continue reading →

The Morning After

Posted on by

After yesterday’s enactment of Minnesota’s gay marriage law, I was pleased to wake up this morning to see that:

1)   The sun rose, Armageddon had not arrived.   Fire, brimstone and locusts appeared to be in short supply;

2)   I was still married, despite the unsuccessful defense of my marriage;

3)   Thousands of Minnesotans had not converted to gayism, as per the alleged “Gay Agenda.”

Continue reading →

Symmetrical Couples and Asymmetrical Stadiums

Posted on by

Yesterday was a tough day for traditionalists.  If you like your weddings square and your stadiums oval, it was not your day.

The Minnesota Senate passed a law extending the freedom to marry to gay people.  A few hours later the Minnesota Vikings presented a stadium design that is more likely to be featured in the Hirshorn Museum than the Football Hall of Fame.

I feel for my conservative friends, who are hopelessly nostalgic for the glory days of their youth, when Ward and June were prototypical couples and football was played in Met Stadium’s glorious mud, wind and ice.  Yesterday, they were served a heapin’ helpin’ of contemporary change, and I know it was jarring for them.  As of this post, shrapnel from Joe Soucheray’s head reportedly has been found in three neighboring states. Continue reading →

If the DFL Wants To Impress, Leave Early

Posted on by

The new DFL majority in the Minnesota State Legislature is anxious to prove to voters that it is better equipped to lead than the previous Republican majority.  The DFL agenda has essentially been the polar opposite of the Republican agenda.  Whatever Republicans did, DFLers are undoing.  Republicans used Minnesota schools as their personal ATM to “balance” their budget.  DFLers are rushing to pay school kids back. Republicans used budget gimmicks instead of fixing the long-term structural deficit.  DFLers are increasing taxes and cutting spending to close the long-term structural deficit. Republicans tried to restrict the freedom to marry.  DFLers are expanding it.

Those are all good and important changes.  But of all the things that DFLers could do to impress Minnesota the swing voters who will determine in 2014 which party remains in control of the Legislature, I submit that the most memorable and impressive achievement would be to adjourn early.

I’m serious.  Declare victory and vamoose early.  Voters would adore legislators for it. Continue reading →