Tracking Minnesota Politics Since 2005
WHAT: Victory Rally with Senator-elect Al Franken
WHO: Minnesota DFL Chair Brian Melendez, United States Senator-elect Al Franken, Franni Franken, US Senator Amy Klobuchar
WHEN: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 12:00 – 1:00 p.m.
WHERE: Minnesota State Capitol, upper mall
75 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive
Saint Paul, MN
After eight months of waiting, Minnesota will finally have full representation in the US Senate. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled today in favor of Al Franken, confirming that he won the recount and is entitled to the Senate seat once occupied by the late Senator Paul Wellstone. Today we start the process of moving forward, of tackling the work of governing this state, starting a new day of progressive values and protection of our most needy citizens. Today we can rest easy knowing that our election system was tested and came through shining. Today we can let out a collective deep sigh, and know that the waiting is over.
Congratulations Al Franken, and congratulations to all the staff, interns, volunteers, voters, donors, lawyers, students, moms, dads, first time voters, absentee voters, college students, folks from Albert Lea to the Northwest Angle, from the north side to the lakeside, from the Iron Range to the Twin Cities - congratulations Minnesota.
We did it.
Coleman congratulated Franken, and thanked Amy Klobuchar and her staff for their hard work while Minnesota had only one Senator.
UPDATE: Tell Governor Tim Pawlenty to sign the certificate of election! Rally on the steps of the Capitol tomorrow at noon.
UPDATE: Norm Coleman concedes!
Republicans know they’ll need every last dollar in next year’s campaign if they want to keep Democrats from topping 60 seats in the Senate.
So with potentially better Senate investments on the horizon, is it worth continuing to pour money into Norm Coleman’s long-shot Senate campaign if the race keeps going on and on?
Everybody in the country has given Coleman up for dead, except for one man:
Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, insists the Coleman challenge is money well-spent, and it won’t hurt his 2010 coffers.
“I don’t think it’s a factor on 2010,” Cornyn told POLITICO. “Norm has been raising a bunch of his own money, and the RNC and the NRSC [have] been helping some too.”
Read more here.
From Minnesota Progressive Project we learn that Brod Tweeted the following yesterday morning:
laurabrod Did you know… Ontario women wait 168 days for breast cancer surgery and men wait 98 days for prostate surgery. about 2 hours ago from web
Frankly, I’m a little shocked that this passed Brod’s smell test. I would think any reasonable person would find that stat suspicious. Two Putt Tommy did the leg work proving Brod was way off the mark. Turns out the average wait time for breast cancer surgery is 34 days, and that serious cases get immediate treatment.
Canada’s health care system isn’t perfect, but to quote Daniel Patrick Moynihan: “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.”
Right now it appears the answer to that question is yes. Despite speculation that Kelliher would follow the precedent set by Matt Entenza and Marty Seifert, I’m told that the Speaker plans to keep the corner office at the State Office Building for the foreseeable future.
Other sources, however, tell me that while Kelliher currently plans to remain Speaker, these plans are not set in stone. There are some who worry that the House DFL Caucus will be handicapped as they approach to 2010 election without a Speaker to raise money and recruit candidates (I’m told that Tony Sertich has already agreed to run the Caucus campaign). Others worry that Kelliher’s gubernatorial campaign will suffer because her duties as Speaker will eat up time. On the other hand, Kelliher’s departure from House leadership would create two hotly contested leaderhip races. Current Majority Leader Tony Sertich is certain to run for Speaker if Kelliher leaves (opening up his position), but no one I talked to thinks he’d clear the field. I’ll have more on the succession possibilities in a post tomorrow, but these races could get ugly fast and rob the Caucus of the unity that will be critical as they try to keep their sizable majority.
One last bit of information is worth noting: Speaker Kelliher’s standing within the House DFL Caucus is still very strong. While many are disappointed with the outcome of the 2009 session, most members still have a lot of confidence in Kelliher’s leadership.
A classic example of a market failure is pollution. Pollution is an negative externality — a negative result of the manufacturing process that is borne by society at large, not just by the manufacturer. Although manufacturers produce pollution, they aren’t the only ones to pay for it. Manufacturers actually have an incentive to pollute if they can make their products more cheaply, because they don’t bear the costs of higher pollution. The solution is simple: The market needs to be tweaked so manufacturers pay the cost of pollution. Once the costs are passed along to manufacturers, they suddenly have an incentive to minimize the costs imposed on the public.
Cap and trade is a popular method for dealing with the problem of externalities. The advantage of this method is that it still allows the market to function — it simply turns pollution from an externality into a natural component of the free market. We’ve used cap and trade before in the United States, in fact, to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions which lead to acid rain. The Environmental Defense Fund has some charts that show just how well cap and trade has worked for SO2 emissions, such as the chart to the right.
Market failures can weaken our economy; they can also cost the public billions of dollars in the case of externalities like pollution. Right now, Americans are working to remake our economy in the wake of a major recession; we’re moving towards a green economy in which the United States once again manufactures things. It only makes sense that one component of that change should be reducing the externalities in our market and bringing the costs of carbon pollution into the marketplace.
So far we have pushed up global temperatures by only about 0.8 C - but because of the 40 or 50 year time lag between emissions and temperature rise, the emissions already in the atmosphere commit us to raising temperatures by around another 0.6 degrees over the coming decades34 - which could easily place us right at the peak of the hill – or even over it.
If we do pass this critical threshold, global temperatures could soar by as much as 6 degrees.
The video is well worth a watch. You can also see the full script, complete with citations.
Wake Up, Freak Out - then Get a Grip from Leo Murray on Vimeo.
So far we have pushed up global temperatures by only about 0.8 C - but because of the 40 or 50 year time lag between emissions and temperature rise, the emissions already in the atmosphere commit us to raising temperatures by around another 0.6 degrees over the coming decades34 - which could easily place us right at the peak of the hill – or even over it.
If we do pass this critical threshold, global temperatures could soar by as much as 6 degrees.
The cap-and-trade bill which passed the House yesterday is one step toward making that a reality. The underlying goal of the bill — combating global warming — is obviously important in its own right. It’s astonishing to me that many conservatives call it a “hoax,” but global warming has the potential to be absolutely devastating to our country and the world. In addition to fighting global warming, though, cap-and-trade will also encourage the invention and manufacture of new green technologies as American companies seek to reduce their carbon emissions.
Yes, there will be costs. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the net cost will be approximately $175 per household per year. The EPA estimates the bill will decrease household consumption by approximately $80 - $110 per household. Of course, this doesn’t even consider the long-term benefits of reducing climate change. If we don’t get a handle on climate change quickly, the costs will be far greater.
For the reduction in greenhouse gases the new policy will achieve, the costs are well worth it. As an added bonus, cap-and-trade will create new markets for green technology, moving us closer to a green economy. A green economy, in turn, is an economy in which America once again produces things and creates value — meaning we no longer need to lurch from one speculative bubble to the next.
Good for Keith Ellison, my Representative in CD5. Ellison, a member of the progressive caucus, says he will “not be dissuaded” from opposing any attempt at health reform that leaves out a public plan.
Ellison also says his ideal plan would be a single-payer plan. Let’s not forget that the public plan is a compromise between single-payer and a more market-based system. Just that plan represents an enormous concession, and the loss of significant savings. Let’s not water health reform down any further.
In his latest, Flynn asks whether Collin Peterson’s compromise on cap and trade means global apocalypse:
Does his flip-flop at the expense of Ag, Sportsmen and Industry make him vulnerable?
Is this the end of the Blue Dogs?
He seems unaware that legislators often make compromises — that’s how business gets done in Congress. This was a silly topic to begin with, but I just love Flynn’s final thought. MDE is going to seriously miss Brodkorb.
Is this the end of the Minnesota Republican Party?
A week after a high-profile uproar with comedian David Letterman over the late-night host’s joke about her daughter, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is again sharply responding to the appearance of her children in the public sphere.
…
“Recently we learned of a malicious desecration of a photo of the Governor and baby Trig that has become an iconic representation of a mother’s love for a special needs child,” Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapelton said in a statement provided to CNN. “The mere idea of someone doctoring the photo of a special needs baby is appalling.”
The latest “outrage,” seen above, has absolutely nothing to do with Trig Palin. The blogger responsible for the photo superimposed the face of a conservative Alaska talk-show host Eddie Burke over Trig’s face, by way of saying that Burke is far too close to Palin. Does she really not understand that? Does she really believe this photo is a “malicious desecration?” Or is this just her way of staying in the media for yet another week?
You know, I feel terrible for Trig Palin. He is going to grow up as his mother’s favorite political tool, being trotted out to inspire the base, and thrown out in front of her as a shield against any political attack.
People Are Shouting
RSS