This is not at all a surprise but still, a big one.
Minnesota Farmers Union President Doug Peterson:
“Al Franken will be a Senator rural Minnesota can count on. He knows the important role agriculture plays in Minnesota’s economy, but he also understands what it means to make a living off the land. And I’m confident that Al has what it takes to keep the rural economy strong for generations to come, working to build roads, bridges, schools, and hospitals — and helping to keep our young people in our communities. Family farmers need a reliable and strong advocate in the Senate, and I can tell you that’s exactly what they’ll get in Al Franken.”
Al Franken:
“I am honored by this endorsement and proud of all the support I’ve received from the family farmers who make Minnesota a national leader in agriculture. I will work hard in Washington to protect and strengthen the farm safety net, support trade policies that help our family farmers, and create jobs in rural Minnesota by making it the epicenter and engine of a renewable energy economy. Norm Coleman hasn’t always stood up for Minnesota farmers – but I’ll be a Senator they can count on.”
Full audio of Franken accepting this endorsement here.
The DFL chimed in today too:
Since his arrival in the Senate, Norm Coleman has consistently put the special interests in Washington, D.C. before the interests of Minnesota farmers. From his vote for the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) to his votes to cut funding for renewable-energy programs and his vote against County of Origin Labeling (COOL), Norm Coleman has continually hung rural Minnesota out to dry.
Full press release below.
Voted For CAFTA Even When Minnesota Sugar Farmers Opposed It
Voted For CAFTA; Defended His Vote, Saying “The Only Commodity I Hurt Was Sugar.” In June 2005, Norm Coleman voted twice in favor of the Central American Free Trade Agreement between the U.S. and Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic. In August 2006, Coleman held a meeting in Breckenridge and defended his vote. “’The frustration is that people thought that I was pressured on this issue,’ Coleman said. ‘The only commodity I hurt was sugar.’ He said it’s important to pick your fights and he chose to ‘save our friends.’ Coleman said it was more important to help other farmers and companies that use farm produce to market their products.” [Vote 170, 6/30/05; Vote 169,6/29/05; Wahpeton Daily News, 8/31/06]
- Coleman On Final CAFTA Sugar Agreement: “I Hope My Friends In The Sugar Industry Reflect On What’s Best For Them.” In July 2005, the Grand Forks Herald reported, “Coleman touted a new sucrose-to-ethanol program, among other things, and said opposing DR-CAFTA would make ‘sugar an outcast.’ ‘My sense, my colleagues’ sense, is that we got as good as we can get,’ Coleman says. ‘I think it’s a very, very good deal,’ adding, ‘I hope my friends in the sugar industry reflect on what’s best for them.’” [Grand Forks Herald, 7/4/05]
- Coleman On Sugar Industry Opposition To CAFTA: “Sometimes You Have To Tell Your Friends That Their Judgment Is Simply Wrong.” In July 2005, Coleman defended the final sugar deal on CAFTA. “I firmly believe this is in the best interests of sugar,” Coleman said. “Sometimes you have to tell your friends that their judgment is simply wrong.” [Grand Forks Herald, 7/4/05]
- Minnesota Sugar Beet Growers Were “Extremely Disappointed” By Coleman Vote For CAFTA; Called His Defense ‘Misleading.” In August 2006, Coleman held a meeting in Breckenridge, during which he defended his vote for the Central American Free trade Agreement. According to the Wahpeton Daily News, “Local sugar beet groups used this meeting as a means to voice their displeasure in Coleman changing his vote to support the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) after he had been a longtime opponent. ‘We’re extremely disappointed he didn’t stay with his commitment to us,’ said Mike Hasbargen, chairman of the Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative Board. Coleman argued that since CAFTA went into effect the sugar industry hasn’t suffered a decline in sugar prices. This is misleading, Hasbargen said. When Coleman said no one’s been hurt, that’s true for now. ‘But in the long run what we’ve given or traded away will be detrimental in the long run.’” [Wahpeton Daily News, 8/31/06]
- American Sugar Alliance Opposed CAFTA Even With Coleman’s Changes. In June 2005, a spokesman for the American Sugar Alliance said of CAFTA’s sugar deal, “It’s not a fix to our problem. It’s a Band-Aid over a gaping wound.” Arguing that the agreement provided no more protection from cheap sugar imports than was already afforded under farm legislation, spokesman Phillip Hayes said, “If you vote for CAFTA, it’s forever.” [Star Tribune, 6/30/05]
- Leaked Memo Revealed Coleman CAFTA Compromise To Be Ineffective At Stopping Imports From Stealing U.S. Sugar Producers’ Business. In a memo leaked to the press in July 2005, Coleman’s CAFTA compromise was described as ineffective at stopping imports from stealing American sugar producers’ business. The memo, written by opponents of the sugar industry, showed them to be pleased with the deal because it did little to change CAFTA from the original Bush administration proposal. The memo states that Coleman-touted aspects of the compromise like the importation restrictions and directives on ethanol production were toothless. Randy Green, a former USDA official states in the memo that if the market “needs imports - which the Administration says they expect will be the case in 2005/06 - no limits would apply, and no sugar would be bought by CCC to be turned into ethanol or anything else.” [Grand Forks Herald, 7/14/05]
- Farmers Union President Slammed COOL Delay. National Farmers Union President Dave Frederickson condemned the provision in the 2004 Omnibus spending bill to delay COOL’s implementation by two years. “I am appalled that this attack on the country-of-origin food labeling law was not debated in public,” Frederickson said. “At the insistence of the Bush administration, congressional leadership slipped this delay into the comprehensive spending bill behind closed doors and at the expense of consumers, American farmers and our trading relationships.” [National Farmers Union Press Release, 1/22/04]
- Coleman Opposed Klobuchar-Supported Payment Caps And Income Limits In 2007 Farm Bill. In 2007, Senator Klobuchar signed on to a proposal to deny government subsidies to farmers with more than $750,000 in adjusted gross income and to cap payments at $250,000. About 100 Minnesota farms would exceed the payment cap. Coleman opposed both payment caps and income limits for full-time farmers, instead supporting “a more modest set of reforms… including one that would lower the income limit for ‘part-time’ farmers — those who derive less than two-thirds of their income from farming — from the current $2.5 million to $750,000.” “If we proceed unwisely on this matter, we could jeopardize the entire farm bill and invite legislative attacks on Minnesota’s farmers,” Coleman said. “Minnesota has a lot to lose if that occurs.” [Star Tribune,12/3/07]
- Coleman Said Votes Against Klobuchar’s Two “Good Bills” Were Tough. In December 2007, Coleman voted against two amendments by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) to the Farm Bill, but admitted days later that these were “tough votes because they were good bills,” according to the Associated Press.” [Associated Press, 12/14/02]
Voted To Delay Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling
Coleman Voted to Delay COOL For Two Years, Downplayed Its Importance. Coleman voted for the FY04 Omnibus Appropriations bill, which gave retailers an extra two years to begin putting country-of-origin labels on food. “I’d like to see COOL implemented in a way that doesn’t significantly increase the cost and burden to our producers,” Coleman said. “They’ve got enough problems.” Coleman added that he supported the labeling but said, “I don’t think we should delude ourselves into thinking that COOL would have solved the problem of [mad-cow disease].” [Vote 3, 1/22/04; Star Tribune, 1/23/04]
Coleman Voted Against Calling For Funding For Country Of Origin Labeling On Meat Produce. In November 2003, Coleman voted to kill an amendment that would have called for no limits on funding to enforce Country of Origin Labeling requirements. [Vote 443, 11/6/03]
Voted Against Common Sense Caps on Farm Subsidies
2007: Coleman Voted Against Senator Klobuchar’s Common-Sense Payment Limits Amendment. In December 2007, Coleman voted against Senator Klobuchar’s amendment to the 2007 Farm Bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would bar farm subsidy payments to full-time farmers earning more than $750,000 a year, after expenses, and part-time farmers earning more than $250,000 a year, after expenses.” According to the Star Tribune, Klobuchar’s “cap is aimed at the Ted Turners and Scottie Pippens — millionaires who have famously invested in farmland and reaped the benefits of government programs meant for family farmers.” The Tribune also noted that, “according to Klobuchar, few if any Minnesota farmers would run afoul of her plan to cut off payments to those with adjusted gross incomes above $750,000.” [Vote 426, 12/13/07; CQ Votes; Star Tribune, 12/3/07]
2007: Coleman Voted Against Limiting Annual Commodity Payments To $250,000 Per Year. In December 2007, Coleman voted against an amendment to the 2007 Farm Bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, “would cap annual farm payments that any one individual or entity may receive at $250,000 per year. It also would limit the amount that farms could receive during any crop year under specific programs to $40,000 for direct and fixed payments, $60,000 for counter-cyclical and average crop revenue payments, and $150,000 for marketing loan gains and loan deficiency payments.” The savings would have been used to fund new farm assistance programs. [Vote 424, 12/13/07; CQVotes]
Coleman Opposing Renewable Energy Investment
2005: Coleman Voted To Slash $20 Million From Renewable-Energy And Energy-Efficiency Program for Farmers. In December 2005, Coleman cast the deciding vote for a GOP budget package that almost entirely eliminated the popular and successful Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency program for farmers, cutting it from its current $23 million to only $3 million. The Energy Efficiency program had doled out more than $66 million in grants for 400 clean energy projects in Rural America since 2003, including ethanol plants. These projects, valued at over one billion dollars, include bioenergy projects, wind power, and energy efficiency improvements. [Vote 363, 12/21/05; “Senate Passes Deficit Reduction Act Of 2005: Renewable Energy Programs Cut,” Environmental and Energy Institute, 12/19/05]
2006: Coleman Opposed Funding Cellulosic Ethanol, Extending Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit And Clean Energy Bonds. In March 2006, Coleman voted against an amendment that would have funded cellulosic ethanol initiatives and extended the renewable energy production tax credit and clean renewable energy bonds programs for an additional four years. The amendment provided for the following funding: Biomass cellulosic fuels ($250 million), Cellulosic biomass ethanol conversion assistance ($250 million), Renewable energy R&D Solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, hydropower ($290 million). [Vote 42, 3/14/06; Bingaman Floor Speech, 3/14/06]
2004: Coleman Opposed Stand-Alone Renewable Fuel Mandate. In April 2004, Coleman opposed a Daschle amendment to the Internet Tax bill that would have required that gasoline sold in or introduced into the United States contain renewable fuel in specific amounts, beginning with 3.1 billion gallons in 2005 and increasing each year to 5 billion gallons in 2012. [Vote 73, 4/29/04]
Loading ...
Ever the adept demographic targeter Franken appears to have farmers now on board with him. No doubt he will treat them better than women. I challenge any one to find ANY specific idea or policy suggestion on Franken’s website that is written for women. While women line up to help him Franken simply ignores the reality that women have it worse when it comes to healthcare, economics, and education. Women in Frankens world are to be content with just reading policy that is non-gendered. He has absolutely no intension of really turning things around for women. SERIOUSLY his healthcare policy is for both genders, as is his education policy, his economic policy….one can only draw the conclusion that even with all of the heavy lifting women are doing for Franken he still doesn’t understand that women have it so much more worse than men. Franken does have a “Seniors” link to policy on his website - dammit he needs to get that serious about womens issues. Not all women want to marry a breadwinner and stay home and bake apple pies.
I have already met your challenge, troll.
I challenge any one to find ANY specific idea or policy suggestion on Franken’s website that is written against women.
Lojasmo - you have not. There is nothing there.
Nitro - apparently that is good enough for you.
Jesus Christ, Demure one. I certainly have.
Here’s another one.
“Especially disturbing is that the number of children without health insurance actually grew to 8.3 million in 2005. Children who lack health insurance are more likely to miss school and less likely to get minor ailments treated at all.”
What percentage of uninsured kids live in households with single mothers? It’s a rhetorical question, troll.
http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=102194813.html
I believe that insuring all kids is especially important to women. Now, Al is going to be a senator for ALL Minnesotans, and I feel that pandering specifically to women is not called for. You feel differently, but your persistent trolling on the subject is just that….trolling.
“Pay equity. Every person in this country should earn equal pay for an equal day’s work. Women in this country still earn only an average of 77 cents for every dollar that men earn for the same job. Many single women struggle to provide for themselves even while working jobs in well-paying fields. I want to know that my daughter, and every other woman in this country, is being paid fairly for the work that she does.”
“Balancing work and family. Let’s do something to help Minnesotans balance work and family. Too many parents are working too many jobs for not enough money and spending too little time with their kids. Minnesota has the nation’s highest percentage of women in the workforce: 69 percent. And the United States is one of only a handful of countries around the world that does not provide paid maternity leave. I will work to ensure that everyone has this option not only for the care of our children but for our elderly loved ones as well.”
“Violence Against Women. We must break the cycle of violence against our mothers, sisters and daughters both at home and abroad; this is a moral imperative. Women are still subjected to a stunning amount of violence and abuse in this country. That has got to end. That is why I will fight to preserve and strengthen the Violence Against Women Act as well as the Victims of Crime Act. But this moral obligation does not stop at U.S. borders. I will go to Washington to fight for the well-being of women worldwide by working to end human trafficking and by streamlining all of our efforts to protect women around the globe by opening an Office for Women’s Global Initiatives at the State Department.”
“Health care. We must get to universal health coverage. I have a plan for health care in this country that will require every state to develop a system to provide universal coverage and enroll every child in a plan similar to SCHIP. But the kind of care that’s available matters as well. Women deserve affordable access to contraception and reproductive health care in general. Women know their own bodies and can make informed and educated decisions with their doctors. Part of ensuring that women can make these informed decisions is to ensure that all of our children receive age-appropriate sexual education in school. Education, prevention, and access are necessary components of any healthcare plan. You can learn more about my plan by”
http://www.alfranken.com/content/WFF_issues/
Now, Demoron. Kindly can it.
You guys are pathetic. Where does Franken articulate a plan to get to pay equity? He has no plan - he has been running for a long time - he doesn’t really care enough about this issue to put thought into it.
Good he is there to stand up against violence…but again compared to his other issues statements this is really thin. Is he willing to really get tough on the abusers? The leading cause of maternal mortality is violence by men - open the local paper and pretty much every day you will see something about a woman being attacked or killed. Is Al going to push for more funding….Franken’s are hollow words - there are no specific commitments. Given all of the support that the “women for Franken” people are giving this guy - you would think he might invest more than what…an hour on general none specific, feel-good fluff.
Demoron:
You did not ask for specific plans. You stated:
“I challenge any one to find ANY specific idea or policy suggestion”
Done, and done. Now shut the fvck up.
Charming - you find Franken’s incredibly general notions to be specific ideas? Unbelievable! Course you are exactly the kind of guy who is drawn to Franken - because well Franken really is the candidate for the frat boy “Shut the fvck up” crowd.
Demure One,
I challenge you to find anything much more specific on Coleman’s website… if anything at all.
And that is where it always falls apart - too many Democrats - Franken is a perfect example - figure they don’t have to seriously address gender issues because heck the GOPers usually aren’t there for women…so heck no big deal. No doubt this is why things are so bad. Neither candidate gets my vote.
So I guess the issue of Feminism standing for an end to gender bias is all wrong… that now Feminism stands for just switching from a Patriarchal society into a Matriarchal society. Thanks for clearing that up Demure One, I was confused and thought that equality was the goal.
Amuseinc - wanting the inequities to be addressed with actual plans equals matriarchy? No wonder there isn’t a single woman who is running as a Democrat on the ballot for my district - …think of all the crap a progressive woman would have to take if she tried to run or even participate in this party.
Demure One,
The struggle for women’s rights is tough, and I would that anyone would wish to champion that in an age when Republicans still vote against equal pay for equal work. It is pathetic that we would still even have to craft an equal pay law. You are 100% correct that we have a long way to go as a country and as a state.
However, you are not doing your cause, dare I say all of our cause, any good by trashing Franken. It goes without saying, that Norm Coleman will be much worse on women and children’s issues, but that is besides the point. If there are holes in Franken’s ideas, then talk with his campaign. Bring that kind of stuff up on sites like this, but in a more constructive way. I get annoyed that Democrats don’t take the labor movement more seriously, but I do not bash them for it. Please keep saying your piece, but know that you are just hurting your cause with your angry rhetoric against Franken. Do you seriously want someone like Coleman in office who will vote against health care for children? Who the heck do you think pays the price the most for that? You know the answer.
Now, feel free to move to my district if you feel progressive women cannot run in yours. We have Mee Moua, a strong, strong progressive woman as our State Senator, and of course Betty McCollum, need I say more!
I seriously do not get your point, and it seems as if you are fighting for the opposite of your stated purpose?
Thanks, Alec
Wow. I’m glad standing on principles is far more important than ensuring Roe v. Wade remains upheld, Demure One.
Women sure are “lucky” to have an advocate like you protecting them.
Demure you need to move… the fact is that in my district it is slightly more women than men running or in office. Not the DFL’s fault your district doesn’t have the representation you feel is needed. Beyond that you could care less about the progressive aspect, all you seem to care about is a person’s plumbing.
“…think of all the crap a progressive woman would have to take if she tried to run or even participate in this party.”
I’ll bring that up with my state rep.
Somehow, I don’t think she’ll take me seriously….
I need to move? The DFL needs to improve. TPT - interesting thought…course after Betty McCollum got the “shut the fvck up” treatment for questioning Franken’s sexist writings I wonder how comfortable women in the party are about discussing the DFL “men on the stage” women taking notes kind of atmosphere….might be a good topic for people at the upcoming Founders Day event - two guys Franken and Gore are the superstars….I don’t think there are any women on the program…..at least if they are they are not being mentioned in promo material. But then the party founders were men…has there ever been a statewide chair who was a woman? Seriously - maybe there was….that would be interesting.
I’ll assume you’re 18, DO. Please vote for whomever you want. Just don’t expect a big crowd following if you claim you’re leaving the DFL for greener pastures for women’s rights. Grown-ups understand that the GOP has long since decided they need the religious right more than women.
Maybe you can befriend Michelle Bachmann? Doesn’t look like she’s so kissy with W. these days. I bet she’s lonesome and you can persuade her to take on reproductive rights as her new cause since the lightbulb thing seems to have gotten quiet.
Oooh, and you just show that Al Franken what you can do with your vote. Help re-elect Norm and you’ll really get him. Just Google “cutting off your nose to spite your face” before November 4th, please.
lojasmo - this is really weird that quote you provide “Women deserve affordable access to contraception and reproductive health care in general. Women know their own bodies and can make informed and educated decisions with their doctors. Part of ensuring that women can make these informed decisions is to ensure that all of our children receive age-appropriate sexual education in school. Education, prevention, and access are necessary components of any healthcare plan. You can learn more about my plan by” - it sure isn’t part of the Franken’s Healthcare issues material. Was this on his site and then pulled? There isn’t anything about reproductive rights in the healthcare section now.
Demure you live under a bridge… in a mighty weird DFL district since the charter insists on gender representative officers at all levels. Where do you get off acting like the DFL is some sexist organization when all evidence is to the contrary? What a twit… must of studied at the Dworkin Charm School.
Only when manhood is dead - and it will perish when ravaged femininity no longer sustains it - only then will we know what it is to be free.
Andrea Dworkin
Wow - to get to the section about watered down policy for women one can’t go to the regular “issues” tab - one has to go to the “partners” tab, then click on the “women for Franken” tab - and then go to another “issues” tab….he certainly is keeping this part of his website as far from the front page issues…
BTW Amuseinc - your charter insists on gender representation officers at all levels - BUT if you actually take the time to look at all the districts it becomes very clear that there are far more men as chairs - something like two men to every woman - your gender policy doesn’t get at the highest level…
Dear Twit,
Christ on a bicycle you are useless… umm so you mean 50% of all offices within a district is not enough gender equality for you… you want a balance based on each title in separate and different districts? You are fucking nuts… 50% is ummm 50% of all offices within a district. To go outside the district for some arbitrary rule by you is anti-democratic and well stupid… make that STUPID.
Please join the Republican Party… you will raise the average IQ of both political parties. Amuseinc
This is a fun thread. It shows the strong correlation between partisan loyalty and the inability to make an argument without using personal insults. Maybe Barkley should link to it.
Well, KH, it appears DO is the “Chris of the left.” And this thread just goes to show that the DFL is NOT a monolith, as those similar in beliefs as Chris so readily believe.
Absolutely, KH. This site is unique that way. Over at MDE, divergent viewpoints are welcomed with open arms. Obviously, in your world, people with common interests should never work towards their goals collectively because, well, you’re not so hot on why, but they just shouldn’t because you say so — with great derision for anyone who disagrees.
I’m still convinced you’re a paid GOP operative, despite your insistence to the contrary. The only other possibility I can see for a reason for you to hang around a site that promotes and encourages viewpoints you obviously don’t agree with is that you’re incredibly lonesome and need interaction with others so badly you’re willing to do anything to get it.
And DO, really? Using your logic, the Boy Scouts care NOTHING about knot-tying because one has to go incredibly deep into their Web site to find anything on the subject at all. Don’t you have anything better to do than hang around here and annoy people with loaded comments designed to do nothing else? Assuming you’re not like KH and paid to be here to foment dissent (or are just a troll working for free?), clearly you’re not reaching people here. There’s no great silent majority with doubt in their minds now that they’ve read your posts. If you really feel the way you do, (which I can’t fathom, but, OK, let’s roll with it) why don’t you use they time you spend here to organize a Feminists Against the DFL caucus? Worth within your district to bring women to power within the party because humans that possess a penis can’t possibly care about women or work with them to ensure true equality. Little secret, just between us? Your “work” here provoking passionate people into anger isn’t really much of an accomplishment.
Thanks KH
It’s a little alarming that amuseinc doesn’t understand why the gender matters at the highest levels….the chairs get the leadership experiences, the treasurers, secretaries - more support staff positions do provide important training…but one doesn’t get the type of experience that could really help one move on to the stage as a candidate.
I do think the DFL is trying on one level. But I also think there is a pervasive atmosphere that really favors men as the leaders and deciders. Franken’s candidacy isn’t helping that. As the economy falters and as climate change causes more hardship - women are losing even more ground. Oxfam has a really interesting educational piece about this called Sisters of the Planet http://www.oxfam.org.uk/get_involved/campaign/climate_change/sisters/index.html In it you learn frightening stats about mortality rates for women and children - much higher than for men.
We need politicians to put women’s issues front and center on their websites along with their other issues statements. The placement of women’s issues on Franken’s site really underscores at least the perception (personally I think reality) that women’s issues for Franken are on the back burner.
Well, DO - why don’t you go vote for Normie, then?
After all, he’s the one, as PSI Chair, that refused to investigate FORCED PROSTITUTION and FORCED ABORTIONS on a place where the American Flag flies, the Northern Mairanas Islands.
And the GOPers tolerated the FORCED PROSTITUTION and FORCED ABORTION so their supporters could make clothes with the “Made in the USA” labels attached.
Does the name Jack Abramoff ring a bell?
Downtown Chet,
One reason I don’t comment often at MDE is that it is and even more cacophonous echo chamber than this one. I have never made even a hint that I don’t think people should cooperate or act as groups toward a common goal. I do think those goals are best achieved when you reason with others rather than use ridicule and insults to berate them into compliance or simply use political power to force others to support your goals. I guess the insults might just be a juvenile reaction to feeling insecure but I wouldn’t pretend to guess which reason it is for you personally.
Your assumptions about me continue to be as wrong now as they were when you first made them up. That you continue to base you beliefs on assumptions with no evidence other than what you have made up in you head should give everyone an idea of how credible those beliefs are.
I enjoy interaction with those that don’t agree with me because it forces me to continually learn and adjust my beliefs. The opposite affect to that of joining a political party and towing the party line through every obstacle. Collective progress will only happen when we treat each other as thinking individuals and not bodies to be assimilated at all costs into one collective gang or another.
The discussion has drifted far afield.
Of 154 local DFL unit (county and senate district) chairs, 64% are male.
Of 8 Congressional District chairs, 50% are male.
The conversation is still far afield.
Bravo for Franken having garnered the endorsement of the farmers’ organization.