So who will it be?
Current House Majority Leader Tony Sertich is the obvious successor, but not everyone thinks he is a slam dunk for the job. In fact, when I spoke to House insiders earlier this summer, many thought Sertich would face a tough road to the Speaker’s chair. Some worried about his youth, others about geography (Sertich is an Iron Ranger in a caucus that has a lot of metro members) and still others worried about his positions on environmental issues. Sertich, however, has strengthened his position substantially since the early summer. Though it would still not be shocking for Sertich to be challenged from the left (St. Paul Rep. Michael Paymar is apparently interested), he now has to be viewed as the heavy favorite to hold the Speaker’s gavel in January 2011.
Why the change? Well, as Speaker Kelliher has been ramping up her gubernatorial campaign these last few months, Sertich has taken increased responsibility for managing the caucus, including taking control of the House DFL Caucus campaign apparatus. By all accounts, Sertich has handled this increased responsibility well. He’ll still have to navigate the 2010 session and the midterm elections, but if he manages to avoid a major mistake, he’ll probably be Speaker.
Of course, this presents an entirely different question. If Sertich is the Speaker, who takes his place as Majority Leader? The new Leader will almost certainly be a metro area legislator. The House DFL Caucus has an unwritten rule of geographic balance (a metro area Speaker means a rural Majority Leader and vice versa). But even with that restriction, there are a number of plausible candidates and no true frontrunner. I guess we’re just going to have to wait and see.
What is the rationale for the caucus keeping MAK as Speaker even for the 2010 session?
Her conflict of interest as a Gubernatorial candidate would immediately disqualify her as Speaker if I were a legislator.
She is very likely not to be a candidate on February 4th.
Why exactly do you think that?
That's up to the caucus, I guess. As far as conflicts of interest go, given that she's running in a DFL endorsement contest, it seems like all the incentives would be for her to take a harder line against Pawlenty, which is what most people around here have been saying they want her to do. I guess candidate recruitment and fundraising for the caucus might get a little messy, but my understanding is they've handed those responsibilities off to Sertich. What other conflicts of interest do people imagine happening with her?
I'm not exactly thrilled with Rybak running for Mayor at the same time he's running for Governor, since he's going to be doing his job part-time for the rest of next year if he gets the endorsement, will have an incentive to shape city policies to a statewide election, and if he wins, Barb Johnson becomes Mayor for a while. But that's up to the voters of Minneapolis, and they don't seem to think the potential conflicts of interest inherent in Rybak's situation are a big deal, as far as I can tell.
I agree — I don't see how/why the DFL keeps MAK on as Speaker when her focus is clearly on promoting herself to be governor.
You mean there are people in the House to the left of Sertich?
Michael Paymar or Tina LIebling!
I would think Hortman would be the logical choice for Majority Leader. The DFL has historically liked gender and geographical balance. She would be the strongest woman from the 7 county metro.
Hortman does make a lot of sense.
I agree that Hortman will be the choice. Lenczewski has more experience, but when you are tax chair - becoming majority leader would almost be a demotion. Other options could be Hilstrom, Knuth, or Slawik. I would still guess that Hortman would run and win unopposed.
Slawik? As in Nora Slawik? Now there's a "Coffee sprayed all over my computer screen" moment!
My biggest concern with Sertich isn't his youth or his region, it's whether or not he can overcome the lightweight image that comes across in his press conferences and in floor debates. Like Zack says, the increased responsibilities this session will be a good test of his competence.
Interesting comments about gender balance within the caucus. One thing I'd add to that, with eight male DFLers running for Governor, and Taryl Clark running for Congress, there are a number of prominent DFL suburban women legislators who would be in the running for Lt. Governor spots.
Look for representative Joe Atkins (Inver Grove Heights) to make a move. He was a very close second to Sertich in the votes for Majority Leader when he was only in his second term. Joe is one of the best fundraisers in the House and was instrumental in the elections. Not to mention his high marks for you know, actually legislating. Having a Leader or Speaker that can raise money, oversee elections AND can strategize on the legislative process is what we need.
We are a bunch of idiots if we continue to let gender balance trump talent.
DJZ,
I completely agree. Political acumen should be the most important criterion here. Geographic or gender balance has no place if we do not have effective leadership.
Joe Atkins is an AWFUL choice for majority leader. Let me explain - there's fundraising, and then there's what Joe Atkins does and advises. He's not just aggressive, he literally shakes down the industries that appear before his committee, and actively advises his sub-committee chairs to do the same thing. I don't think there's anybody in the House or Senate who has a more troubling set of relationships with his donors than Atkins has. Yet, among his the small clique of caucuus acolytes, the fact that he is able to extract cash from these industries, isn't considered a flashing red light - it's considered acumen. God help the caucus if that guy finds himself in a leadership position.
Glad somebody is finally calling out Atkins for being one of the sleaziest fundraisers either caucus has ever seen. And what's worse is the guy wakls around acting as if the members should thank him for potentially compromising every last one of them. Good thing is the guy has lost his other leadership races and I think it's because enough members know better. Hortman would be okay except her recent letter to the guv about bidding for the olympics makes me wonder if she's on the same planet as me.
The gender balance situation is preposterous at this point. Hortman needs no more protection than MAK. But this archaic boneheaded elementary school one-little-boy-for-every-little-girl situation is growing laughable. So, instead of wondering who would win a contest btw Hortman and Atkins (Hortman would wipe the floor with that guy's hair - and what's with Atkins hair. Is there anybody in the leg who uses more gel?), we have to wonder who will win with the girls, and who will win with the boys. As for the boys, I think the most logical alternative to Atkins is Steve Simon. He's been raising money like mad this year, he's often whispered about for higher office, his colleagues like him, and he doesn't have any of Atkins potential ethical problems. That could be a good race and - for the record - I'm leaning Simon.
Exactly why I like Atkins- he takes their money and still votes against them. MAK does the exact same thing. You think if she wasn't the speaker and just another legislator with a decade in that she would have this ability to raise money? Where do you think that money comes from she raises for the caucus?
ALL of leadership has to shake down the lobbyist. How they do it is not my concern. How they vote is. You don't have to sleep with him, just watch how he works legislation and the respect he has of his colleagues. He does have their respect. He also chairs the powerful Commerce and Labor committee. The more money he raises from businesses for the DFL House Caucus, the less the Republicans raise to build their numbers of naysayers.
Between Tony, Steve and Joe all three would be great majority leaders. I think Joe, however, would make the strongest speaker. Steve is the nicest, smartest, and honest guy that's true. Sertich reminds me of another guy who was Speaker in his early 30's named Martin Sabo. So all three have the talent, just different tactics. Its about what tactics will keep the caucus on the same page and is able to walk back the Republicans when they start slinging their poop.
You staffers gunning for your own favorite would do yourself well to explain why your choice is better than mine. Neither one of us get a vote in on this anyway.
The last couple of years Joe Atkins seemed to be running a contest, mostly against himself, to see who could introduce the stupidest legislation. Do you remember his Indian call center bill? This guy is a serious assclown, and the DFL is making a huge mistake if they make him the face of the party.
Agree with Dan. The reason that Atkins would make a terrible speaker or majority leader is that at least half the caucus can't help but snicker as the guy walks past him. He's a walking, talking joke for the majority of his colleagues who don't think he's a world historical genius (he has his acolytes, though). Self-importance, an ego that has no justification in reality, and that hair which makes reporters laugh - it's all a problem. I don't know if there's ethical problems with his fundraising, but I do know that the guy practically slobbers when he gets near a lobbyist. Sure. MAK, Sertich, Simon etc raise money too, but they don't show how much they get off on the leverage of it. Atkins looks like he has palpitations. Hortman and Simon are smarter than Atkins (actually, that's not hard), and far, far more respected among their colleagues and, not coincidentally, by the media. That matters quite a bit. If the DFL puts up a leader who as Dan puts it is an acknowledged "ass clown" it hurts the caucus.
Are not precinct caucuses set for February 2nd?
Many candidates will know at that point if further struggle is worth it.
And you don't think she'll be successful in the caucuses?
I don't know at this point. But, I think is a real possibility that she wont. At best I'd give her a 20^ chance.
I, as a reality casual observer at this point, have seen very little motion from her campaign. Additionally I just don't see from who she would pick up support post caucus.
Interesting. I disagree obviously, as I think the speaker is in the top three for the endorsement, and if she receives the endorsement I think she'd be the favorite in the primary as well.
I guess we'll have to see.