Minnesota Network for Progressive Action

About Comments
The mnpACT! blog welcomes all comments from visitors, which are immediately posted, but we also filter for spammers:
  • No active URLs or web links are allowed (use www.yourweb.com).
  • No drug or pharma- ceutical names are allowed.
  • Your comment "Name" must be one word with no spaces and cannot be an email address.
You should also note that a few IP addresses and homepage URLs have been banned from posting comments because they have posted multiple spam messages.

Please be aware we monitor ALL comments and reserve the right to delete obvious spam comments.

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Listed on BlogShares

site search

Site Meter
  Progressive Political Blog

Progressive Politics in Minnesota, the Nation, and the World

To Mr. Erdmann: Don't Use The Big Money Problem To Divide Dems

Category: Minnesota Politics
Posted: 08/07/17 19:06, Edited: 08/07/17 19:08

by Dave Mindeman

Jeff Erdmann had an extensive interview with the Uptake which covered a broad range of topics.

I'd like to take a closer look at a few of his statements.

There is no question that money is the scourge of modern day politics. Citizens United opened up the Pandora's Box and we have had to deal with it ever since. Democrats have had to scramble to raise money just as much as Republicans, but to say Democrats are abandoning their principles because of money is just too broad a concept to be justified.

Here is some specifics from Erdmann:

"I think the voters of district CD2, I think they deserve to have competition. Last go around, Angie self-funded a big chunk. This is what happens in politics, is that you see wealthy people come in and they can write a big check for themselves to loan themselves money, and then competition goes away and in a sense, they have no competition and they get the endorsement. I don't think that's good for the democratic process.

"When Stuart Mills (Mills Fleet Farm executive who ran as a Republican for congress in northern Minnesota) goes and tries to buy an election, when Betsy DeVos tries to go and buy a seat as Secretary of Education, I don't think that's okay. And when other candidates try to do that, I don't think that's okay. Especially when you're trying to represent the Democratic Party, which is supposed to be kind of against the influence of big money and trying to buy and lessen or reduce, the voice of the people."

I don't know if Mr. Erdmann was paying attention early on, but Angie Craig did have competition. Mary Lawrence made a brief splash in 2015 by putting in over $1 million of her own money. But she failed to connect with the activist base and dropped out. Angie Craig did self fund at the beginning, but she worked to establish a broader base of support and it paid off.

Erdmann's example of Betsy DeVos is more on point. She made her donations for a different purpose - to buy influence. To buy a seat at the table. Most of the Democrats who raise money, do it to establish name recogntion - to introduce themselves to the party and the electorate. Unfortunately, it takes a large amount of money to do so. If individual donations can reach that level, then we have the ideal situation. Bernie Sanders did it and it took him a long ways. However, Jeff Erdmann has a couple of problems.

First, judging by his comments about the last election, he has not participated in the party. Sure, he may have wished to stay out of the political fray in order to be "authentic" to his students, but authenticity also includes being honest about your political views as well.

If Jeff Erdmann was really considering what was good for the Party and what was good for his place in politics, then he should be running for the legislative seat held by Anna Wills in Rosemount. There his "authenticity" would mean something. He would have an established base. He could learn how to raise money the right way and build a campaign base of volunteers who could help him win a needed legislative slot.

But Erdmann never learned any of that. He didn't get into the trenches. He may have the ideals of a progressive and would vote the right way legislatively - BUT YOU HAVE TO GET ELECTED FIRST.

A Congressional race for a novice is a large undertaking. And without a previous electoral springboard, you simply have to have a donor base of support that can build that name recognition.

Angie Craig did that. She seeded it with her own money. She reached out to all the right people. Hired experienced staff. And kept building that base. And if not for that Trump surge at the end, I think she would have won. She has stated that she will not self fund her campaign this time around. She is going to count on the base of support she built last time. She is not beholden to big money, as Mr. Erdmann would imply.

Erdmann can criticize big money in politics - I will join him in that criticism. But we are where we are. And I think attacking Angie Craig for doing exactly what she needed to do is the wrong approach.

And very divisive within the District Party.

More on the rest of Erdmann's interview later.

Instead Of More Mining Controversy......

Category: Minnesota Politics
Posted: 08/30/16 17:09

by Dave Mindeman

I am sure that most of you, at one time or another, have seen the North Dakota tourism ads (Legendary). North Dakota invested a pretty sizable chunk of money to bring in some tourism dollars.

Here is a summary of a 2014 report on that campaign....

The campaign generated 1.1 million incremental trips that would not otherwise have taken place, which brought $211.1 million in incremental visitor spending and $15.9 million in state and local taxes.

It cost $1.80 in advertising to generate each incremental trip.

Every $1 invested in the North Dakota ad campaign generated $107 in visitor spending and $8 in state/local tax revenue for the benefit of North Dakota residents.

By almost any standard that was a pretty good return. And the additional value of that is that the ad spending can implant the idea that ND is a tourist destination for future trips as well.

The reason I bring this up is that we have, at least I feel, an underutilized tourist destination in this state....I'm talking about the boundary waters.

The Iron Range gets some tourism dollars, but I believe they could be getting a whole lot more as millenials get into more of the rugged outdoor vacations.

Instead of the controversy of mining development that could actually be a detriment to this potential industry, why doesn't the state invest in national advertising in the way North Dakota has done.

I know there is the "Explore Minnesota" campaign and that has provided some benefits, but with the need for jobs in northern Minnesota, why not take the opportunity to greatly expand our tourism outreach.

Before we get into another heated debate about sulfide mining and the controversies that develop with that, how about an extended discussion of what we can do to make the Boundary Waters a national destination?

Hey, what have we got to lose by the conversation?

The People That Know About Broadband Go With The Senate Position

Category: Minnesota Politics
Posted: 04/21/16 22:35, Edited: 04/21/16 22:36

by Dave Mindeman

Here is a list of people who lead various Minnesota organizations. All of these people signed a joint letter that was sent to Minnesota government leadership in the Governor's office and the legislature.

Laura Ziegler
League of Minnesota Cities (LMC)

Emily Pugh
Association of Minnesota Counties (AMC)

Kent Sulem
Minnesota Association of Townships (MAT)

Mike Reardon
Minnesota Association of Community
Telecommunications Administrators (MACTA)

Joe Gould
Minnesota Rural Education Association (MREA)

Dan Larson
Minnesota Rural Counties Caucus (MRCC)

Charlie Vander Aarde
Metro Cities

Tim Flaherty
Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities (CGMC)

Brad Lundell
Schools for Equity in Education (SEE)

Dan Dorman
Greater Minnesota Partnership (GMNP)

Denise Dittrich
Minnesota School Boards Association (MSBA)

This letter was sent to promote one common idea...

Unified Support for Senate Broadband Position

These organizations are advocating for greater Minnesota. They are asking the legislature to do something to push broadband. Notice that they are NOT advocating for the MN GOP House position...the supposed "champions" of greater MN. Nope. They believe that the Senate has the position that will most help greater MN with their desire to expand broadband...their top priority.

So even though the leadership in the Minnesota House keeps talking and talking about how much they are the ones who are working for greater MN needs, it is the people who live and advocate for greater MN who say that it is the DFL Senate that has their back.

So are you going to believe Speaker Kurt Daudt or the people on the above list? The people in the know are the latter.
« First « Previous


« August 2017 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31

Latest posts


(one year)



RSS Feeds

RSS 0.91
RSS 2.0

Powered by
Powered by SBlog
Copyright © Minnesota Network for Progressive Action. All rights reserved. Legal. Privacy Policy. Sitemap.