Friday, June 27, 2008

Walz Rated Top Impact Congressman – Could Sarvi Be Next ?

Those of us in the First District have seen how Congressman Tim Walz operates --- over a dozen formal listening sessions to discuss the Farm Bill, many more sessions addressing veterans issues, seniors issues, health care, and the economy and too many to mention “Hy-Vee” grocery store “constituents meetings” throughout the First District. No doubt that has left an impact on how voters will rate the Congressman’s performance in November’s elections, but the impact that is truly being felt is Walz’s impact on the national agenda.

How Walz has voted on various issues is in stark contrast to the First District’s former Representative Gil Gutknecht. Gutknecht was a “RoveRobot” voting however the Party managers instructed. Walz, on the other hand, has not been afraid to bolt from his Party Leaders … most recently on the FISA vote and Iraq Supplemental.
It’s that contrast that earned Walz the top ranking.
It’s not about Party loyalty … it’s about your conviction to the issues.
Party bosses may compromise for expediency sake, but if you are committed to a progressive, responsible government, you bolt the party.
While some voters based their votes based on Party endorsement, I am an independent who votes on my issues --- a fair tax policy, a fiscally responsible budget that does not burden the next generation, a foreign policy that embraces dialogue not sanctions, a health care system that benefits people not investors in the medical industry, etc.
Essentially, a progressive responsible government.

Recently, a study was done that looked at the impact of the change caused by the 2006 elections. Walz’s progressive, responsible votes were contrasted with Gutknecht’s faux-fiscal conservative, Bush-backing votes and the difference was the largest in all the comparisons from the 109th to the 110th Congress. That doesn’t mean that the First District is the most liberal in the America; instead, it illustrates how “conservative” Gutknecht voted versus moderate Walz.

It’s that change that can cause real impact in the direction of the government. The underlying premise in Boots On commentary to throw Norm Coleman under the bus, is that Coleman is not in sync with the Conservative ideology and that Al Franken would have no more of an impact than Coleman. Much the same as when Keith Ellison replaced Martin Sabo, the votes would have been the same.

That’s where Steve Sarvi comes in.

Walz’s efforts for a more responsible government are impacted by the hardcore Conservatives like John Kline. Based on the same analysis tools cited above, Minnesota’s Second District is rated as the tenth most impactable. The fact that it rated 10th is insignificant, since the question has to be factored in whether the underdog can actually beat the incumbent. For example, the highest ranked impact election involves Orange County Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) seeking his eleventh term. And based on primary voting and previous elections, it seems to be a Solid Republican District. Now, Kline on the other hand is seeing a district that is moving away from embracing the Conservative agenda and toward a progressive approach to government.

The best way to help Tim Walz move the country in a more responsible progressive way is to help Steve Sarvi unseat John Kline. Walz has demonstrated leadership and resolve on many issues, but he needs more like-minded responsible progressive to join him in representing Minnesota and the nation.


Anonymous said...

What more can we ask for then to have a a representitave that stands up for what he believe in. We need more people like Tim Walz in congress. Steve Sarvi and his progressive views is just what this county needs right now.

Anonymous said...

Why on earth would you applaud Walz for voting against overhauling the FISA bill? Do you honestly believe it's a good idea to give people on foreign soil, including terrorists, enemy combatants and other nefarious individuals the same rights as American citizens? The FISA bill was over 30 years old, older than cell phones and satellite phones. The bill actually updates the process (and includes judical oversight that had been missing post 9-11) to keep up with technology and allow our government to get the information needed to combat terrorism.

I think it's pretty radical to vote against overhauling FISA in the post 9/11 world. I'm just wondering if you have your head in the sand or what.