A cookie jar named "Tony"

Former MNGOP chair Tony Sutton, that is

Ken Avidor cartoon

It is becoming more evident with every passing day that the combination bingo parlor, gaming house, and massage salon run by Tony Sutton (and let's not forget Michael Brodkorb, too!) slipped from mere bumbling financial ineptitude into political favoritism and corruption long ago.

More evidence of that comes today in Two Putt Tommy's latest post in his Cooking The Books series. Tommy reports that at around the time he was arrested for DWI -- and had been canned by the Emmer campaign -- Mark Buesgens ("Biscuits" to his friends) received $11,200 from the MNGOP for "consulting." This was in 2010, when Biscuits was a sitting legislator, running for re-election himself.

Laying aside whether the MNGOP should have -- or legally could have -- hired Biscuits as a consultant, and as Tommy points out, think about the timing. If the payment was for work done while he was the campaign manager for Emmer, was it an in-kind contribution to the Emmer campaign? If it was after Biscuits left the Emmer campaign, what did he do that was so valuable to earn $11,200 in such a short time?

You will remember it was revealed by Minnesota Public Radio just last week that candidate for Minnesota senate Dave Thompson received $70,000 in "consulting" fees from Tony's cookie jar in 2010. One of the things mentioned by Pat "Twenty Points" Shortridge (the new MNGOP chair) in defense of that arrangement was, well, Thompson was only a candidate, not an office holder.

Pretty flimsy if you ask me, but even that doesn't fly when you are talking about Biscuits. Add in the fact that Biscuits really needed money at the time the payments were made; he admitted that when he took the job with Emmer; his house was in foreclosure, and he had just lost the Emmer gig. And, of course, he was wrapping up the financial consequences of his DWI.

What do you get? Transparent corruption.

Avidor's cartoon is a perfect metaphor for what was going on at the MNGOP. That would be bad enough, but remember that the cookies were owed to legitimate suppliers to the MNGOP, and as we know, many of them are presently holding the bag, a bag without the cookies.

Michele Bachmann runs again: is she vulnerable this time?

This morning, Rep. Michele Bachmann announced that she will seek a fourth term in Congress. A sentiment heard among left-leaning politicos after the 2010 election was that the millions of dollars poured into the Tarryl Clark campaign were wasted on a race that wasn't winnable. Two years later, Clark is running in a different district, Bachmann's run for President has crashed and burned, and redistricting will reshape the 6th District. Is Bachmann vulnerable in her quest for reelection?

There are a number of factors that seem to say that she is:

1) Campaign debt: One of Bachmann's biggest strengths has been her ability to raise cash for her campaigns. This time campaign funds may be a weakness, not a strength. Donors who maxed out for her Presidential bid can't do it again for her House campaign, and she has millions in debt from her Presidential campaign. Of course, given the state of campaign finance law and her GOP star power, she'll be able to run a campaign, but money may not be huge advantage it was for her in 2010.
2) She's from Iowa: Bachmann's single-minded focus on the Iowa caucus caused her to play up the "native daughter from Waterloo" angle. It's hard to say how much this might affect her in this race, but she's neglected the district and the state of Minnesota for a year now, and that might hurt her.
3) Gaffes from the Presidential campaign: Take your pick, but episodes like confusing Concord, NH with the site of the battle that began the American Revolution, or claiming that the HPV vaccine causes mental retardation are examples of gaffes that have tarnished the Bachmann brand.
4) Low statewide approval: According to Public Policy Polling, Bachmann is saddled with a 57% disapproval rating. Of course she isn't running statewide, but it's undeniable that she limps back into Minnesota having been bruised by the Presidential campaign.

But there are also a number of other reasons she'll be formidable:

1) Who's the opponent? Nobody has declared their candidacy against Bachmann. Her previous opponent, Clark, has declared her candidacy in CD8, and I can't imagine her being able to return. Like Amy Klobuchar, the uphill battle to unseat Bachmann has made recruiting a candidate difficult. Every other Republican incumbent has attracted challengers.
2) Star power: As a House candidate, Bachmann's fundraising prowess was unmatched. Even with her campaign debt, she'll be able to parlay media attention into campaign cash.
3) A loyal base: No matter her gaffes, Bachmann's true believers in her base haven't abandoned her. She'll be able to count on them again.

Obviously, redistricting is the wildcard in this equation. The Martin map submitted to the Special Redistricting Panel would place Bachmann into a blue CD4 along with DFL Rep. Betty McCollum. Of course, Bachmann could run in CD6 anyway and she wouldn't even have to move. And there will be a red-leaning CD6 regardless of which map the panel draws in which Bachmann can run as an incumbent.

Unless a powerful candidate enters the race again Bachmann soon or she ends up running against McCollum, she appears set to earn re-election.

I hope I'm wrong, and I could be if her image is more tarnished from the Presidential campaign than I think it is. But I won't jump on the bandwagon until I see who's driving it.

Follow me on Twitter @aaronklemz

Not Almanac: episode one

Tony Petrangelo (who blogs at Minnesota Progressive Project as Tony "Angelo"), and Aaron Klemz and I (Steve Timmer), who both blog here, have embarked on a new project, a weekly (we hope) political podcast about state politics. We recorded the first episode Sunday night in anticipation of the opening of the legislative session.

Since we're new at this, it required some editing by Tony, but here it is, the inaugural "Not Almanac" podcast. That's the working title, but we may keep it.

Here is a download link for our podcasts.

Well, Morrie, just exactly who the BLANK do you think you are?

Morrie misunderstands his role in the universe, entirely!

Morrie Lanning, a Republican representative from just about as far as you can get from the Twin Cities and still be in Minnesota, had the vapors over Mark Dayton's assessment that the Dome site is the only really viable one:

“For those who think that everything has shifted now – Metrodome is it, that’s finished, it’s a done deal. That’s not where I’m at,” said Lanning, who said the Metrodome location continued to have multiple drawbacks. “There are those who have already walked away from Arden Hills -- I have not done so.”

Apparently, Morrie hasn't figured out that he is, in fact, a minor player in the drama. You see, Morrie has virtually no skin in the game, which made him the perfect hod carrier for the bill in the first place. But now, frankly, he forgets himself.

Morrie can do all the wishin' and hopin' he wants, but a stadium in Arden Hills -- or Shakopee, for that matter -- just isn't going to happen. (Anybody who disagrees with me is free to write in a tell me how it might.) That leaves two sites in Minneapolis, and you can bet that the mayor and the city council are going to decide which one it is, if there is one at all.

Minneapolis, can on the one hand, turn the Basilica into the foyer for a new stadium. Since the city is key to assembling the land necessary for the Linden Avenue site, and since the council isn't exactly on board with the whole idea of a new stadium in the first place, a plan that requires that even more property be taken off the property tax rolls and more major infrastructure improvements, seems unlikely to fly.

Or, it can take the existing site, the Dome, and make use of all the existing infrastructure: the roads, the rail line, the utilities in the ground, all of it.

Morrie's "multiple drawbacks" all stem from the fact that the Vikings would have to play in another brand new publically-financed stadium across the river for a couple of years.

Well, boo hoo. As blogger sidekick Aaron reminded me, the Bears played in Champaign while Soldier Field was renovated; the two places are separated by about 140 miles.

Moorhead and Minneapolis are separated by quite a bit more than that.

Circular Face Punching Squad

Image Credit: Ken Avidor

The Amy Koch "I'm looking forward!" media tour continued Monday, with a series of short interviews in which she "takes responsibility" for somethingsomething that really doesn't matter now, anyway. But whatever that thing was, it was like a "punch in the face." But she wants to "close the book" on it.

David Hann says that "if anyone got punched in the face, it was the [Republican] caucus."  

Dave Senjem says the Koch affair is in the past, and that if the DFL wants to see the ethics of the matter examined, they can file their own complaint. Oh, and no comment about what Hann said.

The former Deputy, Geoff Michel, isn't saying anything.

DFL Chair Ken Martin says that Koch "has suffered enough" and she shouldn't face an ethics hearing. 

Huh?

I don't know what's going on in Martin's head, but the central figures have not been honest and forthcoming, and there should be ethics hearings. If this episode didn't bring the Senate into disrepute, what does?

Here are Amy Koch's own words. You tell me, are these open, honest, and contrite words?

Koch - whose new Capitol office, on a separate floor from her former leadership suite, features a framed picture of her with Gingrich - said politicians have to accept that voters will judge them on their private lives. "You're in the public eye and that will happen," Koch said. "I don't know whether it's fair." 

"I don't play gender politics. I don't think it serves to kind of rehash or try to come up with a 'why.'...People have brought that to my attention. People will decide on that themselves." 

She says she wrestled with the decision to leave her post. "There have been a lot of people who told me that I shouldn't have even stepped down from majority leader," Koch said. 

Koch says she's done enough. "I have given a very public apology," she said.

And that's that! 

Look, if you believe that Amy Koch has been through enough, okay. I disagree, but you can make a somewhat reasonable case that her previous apology and stepping down from leadership is sufficient.

But what of Geoff Michel, who admitted to sitting on this information for two months before he did anything about it, and misled the public about it once it was revealed? Or, if you believe Cal Ludeman when he says there's nothing about having relationships with subordinates in the ethics rules, and this is therefore an "HR issue," doesn't that seem wrong to you? If a misleading tweet from the floor is a legitimate subject for an ethics reprimand, or a staffer's dismissive email to a constituent is grounds for an ethics complaint, how can this be a lesser issue?

There are ways to pursue this that don't involve filing an ethics complaint against Senator Koch. Two spring to mind. One, file an ethics complaint about the conduct of former Deputy Geoff Michel for his two months of inaction after being informed of a clearly inappropriate relationship between supervisor and subordinate, and misleading the public about when he knew. Two, seek to amend the Senate Rules to specify that relationships between supervisors and subordinates in the Legislature are, in fact, unethical.

The circular face punching squad that is the GOP Senate Caucus clearly haven't even yet resolved these issues internally. Their desire to move on is understandable, but this story hasn't even been fully told yet and changes are needed to ensure it doesn't happen again.

Follow me on Twitter @aaronklemz

The Minnesota Senate has still not found the perp

We're on the eve of the session, too!

Ken Avidor cartoon

Concentrate now, Amy, and tell me which one it was.

I . . . I'm not sure. I do remember that he had these weird chicken feet.

Since the fellow is probably still working in the Senate, we have to track him down.

No, I'm sorry; I just don't see him.

Amendment politics: how many and which ones?

The over/under on the number of constitutional amendments on Minnesota's 2012 ballot is 3.5. Do you want the over or the under?

We know that there will be one (assuming that the DFL effort to remove the marriage discrimination amendment from the ballot fails), but how many more are on the way? According to Rep. Steve Drazkowski, many more:

How many pages will be added in 2012?

"We have these conservative majorities in the House and Senate at the same time, and that has not existed for 39 years," said Rep. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, who's pushing both the supermajority and "right to work" amendments. "So these are proposals where there hasn't been an opportunity to place them in front of Minnesotans for a very long time."

Republican members of the Legislature are governing as if they know they won't be in power for another 39 years. They have good reason to fear losing their grip on the Legislature, given the news from the last couple of months. So rather than trying to win their own elections, they've resolved to re-un-level the playing field to ensure their return to minority party status will be accompanied by more tools to block what they don't like. Or, in the case of the "right to work for less!" and Voter ID amendments, to change the electoral landscape in ways that favor the GOP.

One issue that is often lost when discussing the "amendment version" of legislation like Voter ID or the union-busting "right to work" laws is that the nature of constitutional amendments do not permit detail and nuance. The constitutional amendments will be short, declarative statements, and it will be up to the courts to interpret them. For example, the Voter ID bill that was vetoed by Governor Dayton wasn't simply a Voter ID bill. It would have radically reshaped Minnesota's electoral system, forced the use of provisional ballots, and contained dozens of provisions that cannot be contained in a constitutional ballot question. In several ways, the Voter ID amendment is preferable to the Voter ID legislation that Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer was carrying last session.

But back to our bet. How many amendments? I'm taking the over:

The "Bradlee Dean/Amy Koch Sanctity of Marriage Amendment" is already on the ballot, and it isn't going anywhere. 

The Voter ID crusade of the Minnesota GOP and their fellow traveler James O'Keefe III is very likely to be on the ballot. 

The scuttlebutt around the Capitol was that a "supermajority to raise taxes" amendment was the price of the budget deal for number of conservative first-term legislators. It will be there too. That's three.

I said I was taking the over, but I don't think that #4 will be a "right to work for less" amendment. The GOP is already leery of the amount of resources and energy that will be generated by the opposition to the anti-marriage amendment. Adding a union-busting provision would ensure that Minnesota's 2012 election would look like Wisconsin 2011.

I'm going with the Judicial Elections amendment (The "Impartial Justice Act") that has been pushed since 2005, after a Supreme Court decision changed the rules for judicial elections. This is a good idea that has bipartisan support. But in this case, the appeal of this amendment to someone focused on passing the GOP amendment agenda is that it prevents a campaign of "VOTE NO ON EVERYTHING!" Adding a reasonable amendment in the midst of the ideological ones complicates the ability to campaign against them. That's why I think it will finally make it onto the ballot in 2012 - for the wrong reasons, and in service of somebody's unrelated agenda.

Follow me on Twitter @aaronklemz

Lars Leafblad exploring run for Greiling's seat? (UPDATED)

UPDATE: Mr. Leafblad has decided against running this year. I hope he'll consider it again in the future.

Original Post: 

"The most networked man in the Twin Cities," Lars Leafblad, appears to be exploring a run for the seat being vacated by retiring Rep. Mindy Greiling (DFL - 54B). Leafblad's been talking to other representatives about the possibility. He also lives in Roseville, in Greiling's district.

Leafblad would be a formidable candidate. He's an executive search consultant who publishes Pollen, an online newsletter that is widely read by Minnesota politicos. He's been a Humphrey Policy Fellow, and was formerly the Director of Development at the Humphrey School. 

I hope that Leafblad makes a run for the Legislature. The DFL needs more young, social media savvy folks in public office. 

Follow me on Twitter @aaronklemz

Geoff Michel punches woman in face!

It was Amy Koch

Amy doesn't identify the perpetrator by name, but it's not hard to put two and two together. Here's part of what she said in an interview in the Strib:

"I have taken a punch to the face and can say, 'OK, that one hurt,' and move forward," she said. 

* * * 

Koch said she wants to set the record straight on one point: She said her former chief of staff confronted her about the relationship in late September. But, she said, she never heard about it from fellow senators, including her leadership team. So when they confronted her at the Minneapolis Club in mid-December, Koch said, it came as a complete surprise.

The crime scene was the Minneapolis Club.

Somebody ought to check Michel's photos from that time to see if he has bruised knuckles.

The sunnel comeup tamarra!

Dave Senjem, forward-looking guy!



This is a neat piece of video, focusing as it does on Sen. Bakk's comments about what a bunch of scrubs the Senate Republican leadership is if it doesn't conduct an ethics investigation on L'Affaire Koch, Brodkorb, Michel, et al., and then pulling back to show Dave Senjem sitting right next to Bakk.

Senjem soft shoes off the stage saying, "We've put it all behind us!" All he needed was a straw boater and a walking stick.

If Sens. Senjem and Ingebritson (the chair of the Senate Ethics Committee) cannot summon the courage to look at their caucus' behavior in this, the DFL ought, by God, to help them.

You're right, Dave, it's not a conflict

It's simple corruption

Minnesota Public Radio's Tom Sheck and Catherine Richert had an extended piece on the MPR website today about some of the characters who had a hand in Tony Sutton's cookie jar. If you were one of Tony's vassals, life could indeed be very good.

One of  Boss Tony's machine members was Dave Thompson, now a state senator from Lakeville, elected in 2010. Apparently Dave was having trouble making ends meet in the run up to the election, because Boss Tony hired Dave to the tune of $70,000 to, according to MPR:

Thompson said his work included training candidates to deal with the media and writing opinion pieces. After his original contract ended, the party renewed it.

Among the promising candidates who Thompson was hired to help (the only one identified, by the way) was Lee Byberg, now a member of Congress representing the 7th District.

[hysterical laughter] Sorry.

There is pissing into the wind, boys and girls, and then there is putting money into a Byberg candidacy.

According to the biographical information on Thompson's state senate webpage, he's an attorney and "consultant." In this case, "consultant" means one of Tony's pals.

Clearly, putting Dave on retainer was just a stipend to help keep Dave in the game. And it worked, although Lee went down in flames. Can't have everything, I guess.

For his part, Thompson has absolutely no problem with the arrangement:

"I guess I never saw that as being any kind of conflict, and still don't to this day," Thompson said. "The one thing I would say is that my initial contract ended, and they asked that I stay on and continue to do work for them."

Perhaps, Dave, that's because you're a moral cretin. Tony didn't have a problem with it; that should have told you something right there, Dave.

In the upcoming session, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen, and those of you Minnesota citizens who don't fit into one of the aforesaid categories, when Dave solemnly swears that we need voter ID -- or whatever -- I suggest you take it with a big grain of salt.

The MNGOP can't keep track of money

A Mike Dean double feature

Yesterday's post featured a video clip of Common Cause Executive Director Mike Dean talking about ALEC's fingerprints all over the Minnesota Capitol. Today, we have another clip from the same interview with Mike discussing the complaint that Common Cause filed with the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board against the Republican Party of Minnesota for multiple campaign and disclosure violations.

ALEC's fingerprints all over the Minnesota Capitol

Common Cause of Minnesota has been dusting for prints, and it has found ALEC's on more than fifty (I think around sixty, actually, at last count) bills offered in the Minnesota Legislature. ALEC is the American Legislative Exchange Council. The ALEC website calls ALEC an "individual membership" organization, but as you will hear in this video from Mike Dean, that is hardly the case.



You can read the Common Cause report here.

Protest SOPA and PIPA

The Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect Intellectual Property Act, (collectively know as the "Turn the First Amendment over to Private Parties Acts") have the support of Minnesota's two senators. The DMCA has already chilled free speech and taken a big bite out of fair use for political comment and parody.

The next time that Al Franken talks about his support of "net neutrality," I submit that the proper response from you is a hollow, derisive laugh.

If you follow the first link above, you'll see the President Obama has signaled some opposition to SOPA and PIPA. Help make him mean it, and do what you can to turn Franken - and even the glacial Klobuchar around.

I've also read some Twitter activity in the last day or so that suggests that the legislation is, for the moment, shelved.

This is the only post at the Stool today.

Number of the day

One million.

Opponents of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker have about 1 million signatures on a petition to force a recall election, according to a state Democratic Party news release.

If the state’s Government Accountability Board rules that at least 540,208 signatures are valid and any legal challenges fail, Wisconsin will hold the third gubernatorial ouster vote in U.S. history.

Update: To put this in perspective, the number of signatures needed to force a recall is 540,208, one-quarter of the 2,160,832 votes cast for Governor in the November 2010 General Election. If indeed there were one million signers, that represents 46% of those who voted in the 2010 election that gave Mr. Walker that nice house in Maple Bluff. As for who the Governor will face in the almost certain recall election, a very good analysis can be found here.

Six softballs from Dan

Dan Nye, who is from my native land -- Edina -- throws down the gauntlet in the Strib, asking six questions of supporters of gay marriage. "Why should I?" Those are word put in Nye's mouth by the writer of the headline, but they reflect pretty accurately the tenor of Nye's questions.

Although he doesn't use the "B" word, it is clear that Nye feels the sting of the label "bigot," and it is just so gosh darn unfair! After all, says Nye, history and culture are on my side! And religion, too! Don't forget religion!

So, like talking to a slow and truculent child, we'll take Nye's questions, one by one, and attempt to satisfy Nye. Not that it will; his mind is as closed as a factory after Mitt Romney came to town. He's just another bug-eyed culture warrior, like Katherine Kersten, who you will shortly come to appreciate he sounds a lot like.

1) Were our ancestors all dumb and bigoted because they thought homosexuality was wrong?

Well, Dan, sorry, but in a word: yes. Really, some of them were just ignorant, for which I don't blame them, because they all lived in a pre-scientific world. I appreciate that Nye doesn't want to live in a scientific world, but it has another name, too: reality.

There have been gays and lesbians from the beginning of time, usually scorned, beaten, and killed, to be sure, as Nye more or less points out, but that doesn't seem like a good reason to a lot of us to continue doing it.

Especially in light of what science tells us about the innateness of sexual orientation. Some people -- it isn't exactly clear what percentage, but it is clearly statistically significant -- are born gay; they don't choose it, and in spite of what, well, bug-eyed culture warriors like Nye, Nienstedt, Adkins, Pritchard, Michele and Marcus Bachmann, Kersten and the rest may think, you simply cannot pray it away.

Not that anybody ought to have to try.

(This is also Katherine Kersten's premiere argument: the wisdom of the ages relieves us of the responsibility to think.)

2) Don't our sexual organs exist for reproduction? How does homosexuality square with that?

Humankind seems to be doing pretty well in the reproduction department, even when you put gays and lesbians on the sidelines. And where do all these homosexuals keep coming from, Dan? Is this really a mystery to you?

Lots of heterosexual couples -- not to mention randy college students -- want to avoid reproduction like the plague. A lot of people we already call "married" have no desire, intention, or ability to have children. So seriously, Dan, what's the big deal?

Marriage is in large measure -- under any circumstance -- a mutual defense pact against the world. Is it so hard to imagine that a person would want someone else to share the world's travails with, even if he or she was gay or lesbian?

It is heartless and self-absorbed to think not.

3) It is no secret that the human sex drive is a lot stronger than is needed for reproduction. Do we just give into those desires, or do we try to control them? The ancients told us that controlling our physical desires is one of the things that distinguish us from the beasts. Sexual desires, if not controlled, easily lead us into trouble.

The ancients also told us that the sun revolved around the earth. And that women were merely empty vessels for a man's seed. (How people squared this with the fact that children sometimes looked like their mother is a mystery that died with the ancients.)

This is also the point where Nye admits his question #2 above, is silly.

According to Dan, a couple should have sex only when they're trying to have a child, otherwise they're mere oxen.

4) Most everyone still agrees that humans can take their sexuality to where it is morally wrong. Almost all will agree that, among other things, adultery, pedophilia and bestiality are wrong. Why should homosexuality, which was once included in this group, be moved to normal sexuality?

This is the question where Nye, who feels so sorry for himself for being called a bigot, becomes himself an odious defamer, unworthy of sympathy, much less respect. Personally, I don't even bother to pity him. Let's look at each of the things that Dan compares a gay or lesbian relationship to.

Adultery is the breach of a promise to be faithful to the person to whom you are married. It is an act of infidelity. Gay and lesbian partners would like to be able to promise fidelity to a partner in a socially-recognized way. Precisely the opposite of adultery.

Pedophilia is a sexual act of a person with someone over whom that person has control. A priest and an altar boy, for example; the latter being incapable of knowing, informed, legal, and free consent to the act. Control is the centerpiece here; it is entirely absent from a loving and consensual gay or lesbian relationship.

Bestiality? Come on, Dan. Comparing a relationship -- a sexual one, among other things -- between two loving human beings with a farm kid's sex with a sheep is beneath, well, even you. I guess, though, I shouldn't be surprised. It is also interesting to me that bestiality laws are the most prevalent in the Bible Belt.

And don't forget Dan, like the altar boy, the goat cannot consent!

5) Prevalent homosexuality has made its appearance in human history before and has never lasted. Why is it going to work this time when all the other appearances failed?

 Homosexuality has waxed and waned before. Why should we bother? Indeed, Dan, why should we bother to do anything? We should accept homosexuality because it is the thing to do to right a wrong that has existed for millenia.

6) Here's one religious question, directed not toward those practicing homosexuality but toward those who support others who do. Should we be trying to encourage others to repent of a wrong, or pat them on the back as they go down a road that could lead to perdition?

My favorite of them all; no doubt. Nye's question assumes a uniformity in religious belief that homosexuality is a sin. Well, Dan, you really need to get out more.

There are a lot of Christians, including moi, who do not believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, and who think that the writers of the Books of Moses (not Moses, incidentally) and the Apostle Paul, living in the pre-science world that they did, didn't get all their Godly dictation exactly straight. Well, so to speak.

Picking and choosing Scripture to enforce is the hallmark of a culture warrior like Nye. But it has nothing to do with authentic faith; it is perhaps its antithesis.

Threaten me and my gay friends with perdition all you like, Dan; you're just a windbag.

Common Cause's Mike Dean on redistricting

In an interview on January 13, 2012, Executive Director of Common Cause Mike Dean offered some remarks on the redistricting process and its current status in Minnesota.



Because of the timing of the Supreme Court's decision, Minnesota citizens will attend their caucuses early in February, picking delegates, but not knowing which Senate District convention the delegates will attend; that's certainly true in some of the more populous parts of the state.

As Mike relates in the video, Common Cause tried to file an amicus brief (that would include a proposed map based on the announced creteria) with the Court, but the request was denied after objection by the Republican Party of Minnesota. The rationale was that the public was invited to provide input earlier on what the decision-making criteria should be.

The only maps extant at that time were the ones that the Republican-controlled Legislature had prepared and which had been vetoed by the Governor. The result of the Court's ruling on the Common Cause request is that only activists and party insiders have the Court's ear on actual maps, as opposed to vague and aspirational considerations.

Mike charitably call the process "broken."

The video is eleven minutes long, but it's your chance to go to school on redistricting.

Look for more video from Mike's interview in coming days, focusing on campaign finance disclosure, political party financing and disclosure hijinks,  and the corrupting role of corporate lobbyists.

Update: Here's a video from Real Progress TV that also might be of interest to you

It features host Audrey Britton interviewing redistricting expert Peter Wattson and MN State Representative Melissa Hortman.

We can build this sucker for $300,000!

And we can buy the whole shebang from Menards!

Lost in the shuffle because of competing bid from Arden Hills, Minneapolis, and Shakopee, Bob Roscoe's masterpiece can be built for $301,000, according to a Menards supervisor.

Rocket Science

Frankly, I don't know why we're not moving on this.

Follow me on Twitter @aaronklemz

Mittens is Gordon Gekko, only meaner

Welcome to the post-Citizens United world

A Super Pac supporting supporting Newt Gingrich has posted, well, let's let Dangerous Minds describe it:

This has to be the single meanest, most vicious political hit piece ever made. It’s a cold, cruel masterpiece of character assassination.

It's about Mitt Romney. Yes, "corporations are people" Mitt.

Here it is; it's long, but you won't be able to take your eyes off of it.

By the way, it also winds up being a tremendous indictment of capitalism as practiced in the United States. As the author at Dangerous Minds concludes:

Ultimately, though, I don’t think this film benefits Newt Gingrich in any way. It utterly destroys Mitt Romney, true, it absolutely skul****ks him and leaves him bleeding from his anus and shivering on the ground in a fetal position, but you’d have to be an absolute idiot if the only question you had when When Mitt Romney Came to Town is over was which one of the other Republicans you were going to vote for!

What this blog needs is some Saint Paul content

Saint Paul Mayor Chris Coleman, taking a run down the Red Bull Crashed Ice track earlier today. I understand he wiped out on the first mogul.

Update: Some of the first footage of the time trials can be viewed here.