MN-02 : Kline Eerily Silent on Troops to Teachers Program

Memorial Day should not only be the time to remember those whom have given the ultimate sacrifice in support of our country, but also to recognize that too many veterans are unemployed.

While Congress may be considering a number of proposals (including Senator Amy Klobuchar’s Veterans Employment Act ), there is one program that could be terminated as a result of the zeal to eliminate the federal government spending.

At the heart of the decision-making is John Kline (R-MN-02). Mr. Kline is Chairman of the Education and Workforce Committee but is also a member of the House Armed Services Committee … thus his views on the troops, teachers and jobs will impact the future of the Troops to Teachers Program.
But like so many other issues, Mr. Kline remains silent … no public comment … no press releases addressing the subject … just silence hoping that voters do not pay attention … especially military veterans looking for a new career after active duty service.

The Troops to Teachers Program is not a new program … it was established in 1994. It has proven to be successful as spotlighted in a March 2006 GAO report indicating that over 80 percent of Troops teachers are male and over 25 percent are African American—characteristics that differ from the overall teacher population. Troops teachers were placed in districts designated as high-need on the basis of serving children who qualify for federal assistance. According to the study, about one third of Troops hired reported teaching in the priority areas of math, science, special education, or vocational education. 60 percent of participants reported that they would not have become a teacher without the TTT program. Since 1993, over 12,000 retired members have brought math, science and foreign language expertise to schools through the program.

Sounds like a good program … putting true “Role Models” in the classroom.
However it faces a threat today as blind budget-cutting that seems to be the mindset of the Republican-controlled House ... funding for the Department of Education is an easy target (especially after so many members campaigned on eliminating the Department during the 2010 elections.)
This week, Mr. Kline’s E&W Committee cut 43 education programs. Mr. Kline, who has targeted programs that job training programs specifically, stated “At a time when our nation faces a historic fiscal crisis, we must make a concerted effort to reduce federal spending. A necessary step in this process is to eliminate and streamline federal programs.”

The TTT program costs …in terms of government spending is modest … funding for the program has declined, from a high of $29 million in FY03 to lower amounts … typically $15 million annually.

The Obama Administration has proposed to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to move it from Education to the Department of Defense. The move to Defense will help ensure it runs smoothly and has no adverse impact on program enrollees while providing .better oversight of program outcomes by simplifying and streamlining program management.

The TTT program has its supporters in Congress … and even improving it … Tom Petri (R-WI) has introduced H.R. 1947 ( the Post-9/11 Troops to Teachers Enhancement Act of 2011) to expand the program, Mr. Kline remains silent … but the legislation has been endorsed by :

The American Legion
The American Military Retirees Association
The Military Officers Association of America (MOAA)
The Military Order of the Purple Heart
The National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE)
The National Education Association (NEA)
The Student Veterans Association

During the last session of Congress, a similar bill was introduced - HR 3943 - which had 171 co-sponsors including Minnesota military veterans Tim Walz (D-MN-01) and Colin Peterson (D-MN-07) … but not Mr. Kline.

Mr. Kline controls the gavel … he wields the power to deny Congressman Petri’s bill a hearing … he controls whether Troops will be encouraged to Teach … Mr. Kline, do the right thing … support the Troops … support Teachers.

MN-02 : Redistricting Opens Door for Morrow

Multiple Choice Question : Why has John Kline won so convincingly each term ?

A. After years of public involvement in service to local communities on school boards and at the state legislature, he is will known to independent voters that are the true majority of Second District constituents.
B. As a Congressman, he has exerted influence to ensure government funds are properly directed to the district for infrastructure investments (roads, water and sewage systems, etc.) but not wasteful “Bridges to Nowhere”.
C. He’s blanketed the airwaves with commercials citing his accomplishments while participating in a public Town Hall meetings non-stop from Memorial Day until Election Day.
D. The national Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee has never funded the challenger.

Ponder that question for a moment, and consider that the Republican-managed Minnesota State Legislature has approved a proposal that re-shapes the Second District. Media reports indicate that Tim Walz (D-MN-01) will lose a reliable group of voters in Nicollet County that will switch to Mr. Kline’s Second District.

Is this bad news for Congressman Walz or Mr. Kline … depends on how you feel about the issues.

There was a reason why people voted for Tim Walz … it was people like me, a true independent that want fiscal responsible legislators … those Nicollet County voters will now have a chance to “meet” John Kline … and John Kline is no Tim Walz (remember Mr. Kline supported TARP and every Defense project while rejecting any attempt to pay for them). There are plenty of voters in Nicollet County that will want to “meet” the DFL candidate that will take on Mr. Kline.

No doubt Mr. Kline will proclaim his “fiscal hawk” persona but once voters compare the fiscally prudent Tim Walz who has not accepted a pay increase while Mr. Kline has awarded excessive bonuses to his employees … while increasing his staff operating expenses (which Tim Walz has routinely returned to the US Treasury), they will recognize Mr. Kline as a true Washington politician who is motivated with self-promotion at the taxpayer's expense.

Yet, there will be voters that will be pondering the aforementioned “Multiple Choice Question” and look for a candidate that has those attributes … and they may be looking for someone from their local area. It turns out that not only has Tim Walz been elected by Nicollet County voters for the past three elections, but also they voted to have Terry Morrow represent Minnesota State House (23A).

For the record, I have never met Terry Morrow (nor Tim Walz or John Kline), so my observations are from his record and votes.

Terry Morrow just always seemed to be there … for example, when the MN-GOP charted a plane to fly into Mankato to defend their budget cuts which the local media reported, but the local meadia also reported that Representative Morrow was at a ceremony honoring a Minnesota National Guard member who was about to be shipping off to Iraq. When the I-35 Bridge collapsed, Representative Morrow was appointed to the committee to review the incident. When the state legislature wanted to review the best ways to confront the increase in unemployment, Representative Morrow joined the bi-partisan Jobs Task Force.
Clearly, Representative Morrow has the respect of his colleagues for the right reasons ... competancy and caring attitude.

Prior to running for the House, Terry Morrow served on the Saint Peter School Board for several years.
Representative Morrow is currently a member of the House Agriculture, Rural Economies & Veterans Affairs Committee and the House State and Local Government Operations Reform, Technology & Elections Committee, and is also a member of the Finance subcommitteees for the Transportation and Transit Policy and Oversight Division and the Transportation Finance and Policy Division.

As large as the Second District is many voters may not know Representative Morrow … unless they saw the ridiculous attack ads that were run by Take Back Minnesota … while TakeBack Minnesota efforts were successful in converting the legislature to Republican, District 23-A voters overwhelmingly voted to have Terry Morrow represent them in the House.

My answer to the “Multiple Choice question” is D --- the DCCC has not financially supported Mr. Kline’s opponent.

IMO, voters don’t know John Kline … he’s a Washington insider … best known in the District as John “Franked Mail” Kline (after all taxpayers funded the bills to tune of $92,942.59 in 2009 which increased to $125.939.89 in 2010) … meeting constituents are managed with Tele-Town Hall phone contacts which Mr. Kline has noted that traditional town halls “have become partisan battlegrounds,” and because the phone calls can be made any time, it limits organized opposition and disruption. Indeed, if a constituent becomes disruptive during his or her question, the congressman on the other end can simply click them off.”
John Kline is simply an incumbent that the DCCC has not decided to challenge, therefore voters just reluctantly accept him.

IMO, it’s time to start a DRAFT Terry Morrow for Congress movement.
The Second District needs somebody that cares about Minnesota and not Washington.

Kline –vs- Walz : Who Said : Don't do your job, don't get paid.

Within virtual seconds of the House approving legislation, John Kline (R-MN-02) was quick to issue a press release entitled John Kline Supports Bill Ensuring Members of Congress Don't Get Paid During Federal Government Shutdown

“April 1, 2011

WASHINGTON – Congressman John Kline supported the “Government Shutdown Prevention Act” which passed the U.S. House of Representatives today. The legislation would forbid salary payments to be disbursed to Members of Congress or the President during a federal government shutdown.

“American taxpayers shouldn’t be left on the hook funding the payroll of the President or members of Congress during a federal government shutdown,” said Kline.

Semantics and spin presents this statement as Mr. Kline opposing any member of Congress and the President getting paid if there is a federal government shutdown … but read it carefully … “ during a federal government shutdown.”

The legislation that Mr. Kline is referring to is HR 1255 -“Government Shutdown Prevention Act”. While the legislation may be called the “Government Shutdown Prevention Act”, it’s real intention is to “Deem and Pass” HR 1 -Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2011 if the Senate does not act by April 6th. The legislation was froth with questions of constitutionality as well as if it adhered to the principles of the Pillars of a New Majority .
Read that discussion on the MN Political Roundtable.

The current salary (2011) for rank-and-file members of the House is $174,000 per year … it’s an annual salary … it’s not a daily or hourly rate … which is why they get paid when they are on “official breaks” when they are campaigning … heck, even if they are ignoring debate invitations while being busy campaigning for other candidates.

The US Senate has already addressed the question of retroactive pay by unanimously approving S 388

(b) Retroactive Pay Prohibited- No pay forfeited in accordance with subsection (a) may be paid retroactively.

But the House has not addressed the question of retroactive pay … in fact, Mr. Kline doesn’t mention that he actually voted against an amendment that would deny retroactive payment of lost wages … that’s a big difference … somehow, I don’t think that neither Mr. Kline nor any member of Congress is going hungry if there is a federal government shutdown … heck, Mr. Kline is accustomed to having lobbyists hosting banquets in his honor.

The amendment that Mr. Kline voted against was offered by Minnesota’s First District Congressman Tim Walz.

Tim Walz speech was concise and succinct. Here are the key comments :

We have an opportunity. The American people did send us here, as you heard on both sides of the aisle, to do a very simple thing--to get the work done and move this country forward. The debate is that there are differences in how to do that. That's the strength of this land. It's democracy. But there is one very strong principle that we can reinforce, that work ethic, that if you do not get your job done, you certainly should not be paid. No middle of the night, no if it passes and goes this way. Very simply, the easiest of things to do: If this Congress after being here 4 months--and I don't care where you put the blame--can't get this done by next week and the government shuts down, there will be no chance of a single paycheck going and no retroactive pay. That's the least we owe those hardworking folks. That's the least that we can do here.

I want to be very clear. I understand the majority is having a problem. They've got a debate happening inside their caucus if compromise is a virtue or a vice. They will work that out and decide, because that's what this debate today was about: Where do we compromise for the good of the American public? I come down on the side of compromise.

But with that being said, if we don't get our work done--and I will do everything in my power to ensure we do not shut this government down--the repercussions are catastrophic for Americans, and not just macroeconomically. Our seniors aren't going to get their checks. We're going to see medical care slowed down to our veterans. We're going to hear from and we have heard from our military commanders that it stresses the readiness of this nation. Our Federal workers and even the hardworking staff here will not receive a paycheck.

How do you go home, to Georgia, to Alabama, to Minnesota, look somebody in the eye and say, We failed because we bickered again but, dang, I'm going to take home that check.

So I tell my colleagues, especially the new Members, if you're a freshman in here, you came with an optimism that should not be able to be beaten out of you. Regardless if you disagree with us with every fiber of your being, the very simple principle that if we can't get this done, let's put skin in the game.

I offer you the rarest of opportunities today, the first time you've had this chance. If you vote ``yes'' on this motion to recommit, it goes to the President today and becomes law of the land, and no one here will be paid. You can look your constituents in the eye and whoever you blame for it, you can say, I'm not getting a paycheck till we fix this.

So I want to be very clear. This is an opportunity, a rare opportunity. You can vote however you want and decide however you want to balance the budget, but do not allow to play games. It is the bright lights of day, the board is going to come up, and you're going to have the opportunity. Not what's in the underlying bill. That doesn't stop from retroactive pay. And that has to pass the Senate. Mitch McConnell and every Republican already voted for my motion to recommit. So you have the chance to say, all right, I disagree with the Democrats on everything in this bill, but I'm not going to go back to Georgia and tell someone I'm picking up a paycheck and then trying to explain, but I voted for it really, but it was a motion to recommit that I didn't agree with and all of this. Nothing. Simple. Seventy-five words. Half page. Don't do your job, don't get paid. No work, no pay. It is very, very simple.

I do not agree with Congressman Walz on every issue … nor on every one of his votes, but on this issue, there should be no debate … Congressman Walz is showing leadership that is sorely missing in Washington.

While it was noteworthy that Mr. Kline awarded his staff very generous bonuses last year, it should be mentioned that Congressman Walz has voluntarily donated Congressional pay raises back to the US Treasury.

The Republicans rule the House … they set the rules including what bills committees hear and what bills get votes, so it is a tragedy that the House Republicans (with the exception of Ron Paul (R-TX-14)) have not advanced Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ-08) legislation … HR 204 Congressional Pay Cut Act. “We are living in tough economic times,” said Congresswoman Giffords. “Everyone is being forced to make sacrifices. Members of Congress can’t ask any American to cut back before we are willing to make some sacrifices of our own. I’m prepared to do that and I want my colleagues to join me. Members of Congress must set an example and there’s no better way to do that than by cutting our own salaries.”

Cutting the salaries of members of Congress is supported by numerous taxpayer groups, like Americans for Tax Reform, Citizens Against Government Waste and the National Taxpayers Union.

Two days after authoring HR 204, Congresswoman Giffords was shot at a “Congress on the Corner” event and has not been available to promote the legislation … shouldn’t the Republican leadership address her bill … instead the Republican leadership wastes precious time (that could otherwise be used to negotiate with the Senate and White House in an effort to keep Government operating) by pushing “Government Shutdown Prevention Act” legislation that even the GOP statement acknowledges that it is not likely to be enacted into law “As with any law, the provisions of H.R. 1255 would only take effect if the bill were approved by the Senate and signed by the president.”

Mr. Kline’s press release typifies a “DoNothing Congress" … that increasling is becoming more expensive and ineffective.

MN-02 : Kline Eerily Silent After Taxpayer Victory on JSF Engine

It seems that John Kline (R-MN-02) takes every opportunity to alert voters to Washington’s Reckless Spending … but not this week when the Department of Defense issued a stop-work order

DOD Issues Stop Work Order on the JSF F136 Extra Engine Program

The Department of Defense (DoD) today issued a stop work order in connection with the Joint Strike Fighter extra engine program.
The administration and the DoD strongly oppose the extra engine program, as reflected in the President’s fiscal 2012 budget proposal that was recently submitted to Congress, which does not include funding for the program. In our view it is a waste of taxpayer money that can be used to fund higher Departmental priorities, and should be ended now.
The House of Representatives has recently expressed its own opposition to the extra engine in its passage of H.R. 1 including the adoption of the Rooney Amendment which removed all fiscal 2011 funding for this program. In addition, funding for the extra engine was not authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2011, enacted in January. In light of these recent events, Congressional prerogatives, and the administration’s view of the program, we have concluded that a stop work order is now the correct course. The stop work order will remain in place pending final resolution of the program’s future, for a period not to exceed 90 days, unless extended by agreement of the government and the contractor.

Some considered this to be a victory for the TaxEnoughAlready movement that advocate Fiscal Responsible operation of OUR government.

Yes, some did issue press releases …
Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) :
I have long called for the elimination of funding for a second F-35 jet engine which is a wasteful use of taxpayer money," said Senator Collins. "As we begin to tackle the mounting debt, we must eliminate programs like this that are duplicative and unnecessary. I applaud the Secretary of Defense's decision to halt further development of the extra engine."

Congressman John Larson (D-CT-01) “I applaud Secretary Gates for following through on his commitment to end the Joint Strike Fighter’s duplicative ‘extra’ engine program,” Congressman Larson said. “This program is the epitome of government waste, one that the Secretary himself referred to as an ‘unnecessary and extravagant expense.’ Today’s decision will save the American people nearly a million dollars a day and bring to close an issue that has been debated in Congress for more than 4 years. I hope that my colleagues will now join me in focusing our attention on more pressing national security matters.

Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) “The termination of the alternate engine program is an essential step toward focusing our scarce defense dollars on the programs that will actually help keep America safer, ” Lieberman said. “As American service members fight to defend our freedoms and safeguard human life across the world, I hope that today’s decision will allow Congress to set this long-debated matter aside and move on to the critical business of the American people.”

That’s correct, Republicans, Democrats and Independent members of Congress laud this ending of another example of Washington’s Reckless Spending.

So, how did this happen.
First, let’s give credit to the man who put the nail in the coffin by corralling 47 freshman House members to score a 233–198 vote on an amendment that scuttled the program … Congressman Tom Rooney (R-FL-16)

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my amendment striking funding for an extra engine for the F-35 fighter Jet to immediately save American taxpayers $450 million dollars.
“It is dubious why Congress continues to fund a program that the Air Force, Navy, the Marine Corps and Department of Defense adamantly state they do not want. Just today, Defense Secretary Gates called the program “an unnecessary and extravagant expense” and stated that this money is needed for higher priority defense efforts. As we decide which cuts to make in our defense, ones that won’t hurt our troops today, this should be at the top of the list.
“Mr. Speaker, the American people sent us here to change how Washington works. This amendment is a perfect opportunity to show your constituents that business as usual in Washington is over. I urge my colleagues to follow through with their promises, to listen to the voters on why they sent us here, and vote to strike funding for this expensive and unnecessary program. Thank you and I yield back the balance of my time.”

Normally, Mr. Kline likes to promote these successes …. but on the F136 alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, Mr. Kline was eerily silent.

Why because Mr. Kline voted to keep the funding going … as did potential President Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) and Raymond Cravaack (R-MN-08).

The Pentagon opposed this program … as did the Bush Administration and the Obama Administration, yet Congress kept funding it.

The choice should have been clear … support John Boehner (R-OH-08) whose chief beneficiary, General Electric is a major employer in Ohio … or support Fiscal Responsible spending.

This vote tells voters who are the Faux Fiscal Conservatives that are working for the Washington powerbrokers … who are truly concerned about addressing wasteful spending.

THANKS to Tim Walz (D-MN-01), Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03), Betty McCollum (D-MN-04), Keith Ellison (D-MN-05) and Colin Peterson (D-MN-07) for voting to end this wasteful program.

How Much Will it Cost for Walz’s Vote on HR 910 ?

The House is rapidly moving forward legislation that could dramatically impact America’s dependence on foreign oil … as one Congressman stated it “could save 1.8 Billion barrels of oil while saving money at the pump.

With legislation of this importance, I am glad that I received a telephone call urging me to contact my Congressman, Tim Walz “to support the passage of the H.R.910 ” -- Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011. The caller quickly confirmed that I was concerned about the rising cost of energy and that “job-killing” regulations must be stopped. I informed the caller that I was concerned about ALL legislation but needed to be informed before I could comment. I asked him if he could tell who the “Sponsor” of the legislation was ? What committees had held hearings on the legislation ? What the Congressional Budget Office report said about the financial implications of the legislation ? And of course, what was the Constitutional authority that was cited for this legislation ?
The caller did not have any of this information … but said the Tim Walz needed to hear from me to support H.R. 910.
I asked him if was calling other states to encourage people to contact their Congressman … Yes, he said he was encouraging people to contact Larry Kissell (D-NC-08), Tim Ryan (D-OH-17), Russ Carnahan (D-MO-03), and others. I said that I would review the legislation and contact Congressman Walz with my view on the legislation but I could not promise him that I would tell him to support HR 910.

Frankly, I was surprised to get a call … after all, I am an independent voter .. having never given a dime to any candidate nor any political party … nor worked on any campaign.

So, who is paying for these calls to be made ? ? ?
According to Maplight, supporters of this legislation contributed to the campaigns of Minnesota Representatives in Congress :
$513,148 – Michelle Bachmann (R-MN-06)
$145,210 – Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03)
$110,050 – John Kline (R-MN-02)
$ 25,500 – Colin Peterson (D-MN-07)
$ 15,050 – Tim Walz (D-MN-01)
$ 11,200 – Keith Ellison (D-MN-05)
$ 2,250 – Betty McCollum (D-MN-04)
$ 1,000 – Raymond Cravaack (R-MN-08)

Obviously, HR 910 is an important piece of legislation to some very important special interests … and those special interests seem to believe that Republicans will understand their concerns.

After seeing the dollars being invested, the next question would be “What’s the facts ? ”.
A quick check of Politifact reveals a FALSE evaluation of the statement that HR 910 will “restrain this regulatory overreach that will restrict oil supplies and cause gasoline prices to rise."

That’s what this legislation is really about … not the the price at the pump, but regulations … as the bill states clearly :

To amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change …

Simply, this legislation will permanently block the EPA’s ability to limit carbon pollution as the bill expressly repeals EPA’s 2009 greenhouse gas reporting rule.


Essentially, what the Republicans want is inaction … and although it is easy to blame this on the Obama Administration, I am struck by a January 2008 letter written by Stephen Johnson, the former EPA administrator, sent to President Bush.

“A robust interagency policy process involving principle meetings over the past 8 months has enabled me to formulate a plan that is prudent and cautious, yet forward-thinking. It creates a framework for responsible, cost-effective, and practical actions.''
He added that actions to reduce carbon emissions, “should spur both private sector and investment in developing new, cost effective technologies and private sector deployment of these technologies at a large scale.

In an earlier commentary, the benefits and costs were presented :

The EPA values the benefits as :
“Today’s action would yield more than $120 billion in annual health benefits in 2014, including avoiding an estimated 14,000 to 36,000 premature deaths, 23,000 nonfatal heart attacks, 21,000 cases of acute bronchitis, 240,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 1.9 million days when people miss school or work due to ozone- and particle pollution-related symptoms. These benefits would far outweigh the annual cost of compliance with the proposed rule, which EPA estimates at $2.8 billion in 2014.”

Why would anyone want to delay $120 billion in annual health benefits ?
The costs are estimated at $2.8 billion ... and existing technology will be used ... and many producers are using this technology.

In fact, the EPA proposals are NOT geared toward small business as the Republicans portray …

from July 1, 2011, until June 30, 2013, only new sources that emit at least 100,000 tons of greenhouse gases per year or existing sources seeking to increase pollution by at least 75,000 tons per year will be required to obtain a greenhouse gas permit.
And for the period after June 2013, EPA has said that it would not even consider applying greenhouse gas requirements to facilities that emit less than 50,000 tons of greenhouse gases per year.

Oh, yeah, regarding the Constitutional authority for this legislation, the Republicans cite Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3 which empowers the Congress to : To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States … hmmm … so the Republicans are rejecting a States Rights argument for protecting air quality … interesting … gosh, I would have thought they may have cited Clause 8: To promote the Progress of Science but that would imply that they believe in science.

Interestingly, HR 910 is called the Energy Tax Prevention Act but EPA has no authority to levy taxes, nor does the Agency propose to do so. Once again, another “name” bill that is really a misnomer.

Also, while the Republicans may like to spin this legislation as a response to gas prices, the good folks at Annenberg Public Policy Center have reviewed the claim that the Obama Administration policies are to be blamed for the rise in the price of gasoline … once again, another FALSE claim. A tip of the hat to Penigma for the Factcheck link .


I will send Congressman Walz an email on HR 910 … and I will tell him to vote against the Republican legislation … no matter how much money the special interests may throw at him, it is not forward-thinking legislation.

For our country to reduce our consumption of oil, improvements in technology are needed. The people funding the campaigns to advance HR 910 are doing so that they maintain their current controls over our dependence … it’s no wonder that John Kline (R-MN-02) wants to kill the FreedomCAR … the oil producers sell more gallons with inefficient vehicles.

Oh, yeah, that Congressman who discussed “save 1.8 Billion barrels of oil while saving money at the pump was talking in opposition to HR 910 ... he knows that regulation will encourage investment in "developing new, cost effective technologies and private sector deployment of these technologies at a large scale" ... the Bush EPA Administration knew what to do, but the current Republicans are too busy protecting their special interests.

MN-02 : Kline Puts Out Help Wanted Sign

Don’t want to wait for the full effects of the healthcare reform and get a job in an industry that’s growing ...

In fact, remember when Senator Chuck Grassley was asked by a constituent how he can get the same kind of health care options members of Congress have, Mr. Grassley said “You can. Just go work for the federal government.”

Good News ! John Kline’s hiring !

Scheduler/Executive Assistant - The office of Rep. John Kline (R-MN) is seeking a D.C. Scheduler/Executive Assistant. This position is responsible for managing the Member’s DC schedule, making travel arrangements, coordinating the DC intern program, and supervising front office operations and staff. Candidates must possess meticulous attention to detail; excellent communications skills; and the ability to multitask, organize, and balance competing priorities in a fast-paced environment. Candidates must have Hill experience. Minnesota ties preferred. Salary commensurate with experience. Please send resume, and cover letter to: JobMN02@mail.house.gov.

Ah, how interesting that we keep hearing that if only government would run like a profit-making business. In today’s economy, most companies are taking every opportunity to reduce staff … attrition means reduction in staff … re-assignment of duties … carry a little extra load.

In essence, the message is : “The American people are tightening their belts and making tough decisions, and they expect the same of their elected leaders. It is time for Washington to get its priorities straight, put our fiscal house in order, and give job creators the freedom they need to put Americans back to work.” … or so said John Kline (R-MN-02) on June 4, 2010.

This really brings us to a discussion of how the Congressional staff is funded.
Of course, the answer is : You and me, the taxpayer.
But who decides how those funds are spent : The Representative.

Each member of the House of Representatives has a Member’s Reimbursement Allowance … which is basically the same amount for everyone with those with Committee leadership given additional monies. The first thing to remember is that the MRA does not have to be spent in total … in fact, Congressman Tim Walz (D-MN-01) has routinely returned monies every year … and Congressman Walz has never accepted a pay increase.
The member can essentially allocate their MRA however they want with some maximum headcount considerations.
In essence, if the Congressman wants to give out year end bonuses … that’s fine
… if the Congressman wants to pay an “executive assistant” more than his Chief of Staff … that’s fine
… if the Congressman wants to spend it on furniture or salary, it doesn’t matter as long as it doesn’t exceed the MRA maximum.
(Oh, and don’t forget the Franked Mail privilege that members of Congress have.)

So, let’s look at Mr. Kline’s staff.
For perspective, in 2007, his total staff salary was $ 813,195; in 2008, it was $880,628; and in 2009 it was $ 943,552.
What was that about “It is time for Washington to get its priorities straight, put our fiscal house in order … ” ?

The guy you want to be is Paul Teller … who Mr. Kline paid $10,000 to be his Executive Director for one month in April of 2009. Mr. Teller was previously employed by Mr. Kline in August 2008 for $8,000 … WOW … that’s fiscal management !

The most high profile position that many Minnesotans may actually deal with is Mr. Kline’s District Director. In 2007, he was paid $105,575.04. Fast forward to 2009, $116,151.55 … that’s over $10,000 and 10% salary increase.

In fact, reviewing the payroll data, it appears that it is not uncommon for Mr. Kline’s staff to receive “year end pay adjustments” to the tune of $2,000 to $3,000 each year … some as much as 30%.

Why Mr. Kline is accepting applications for this Scheduler/Executive Assistant is not stated in his advertisement. One would hope that this would not be a new creation … or a temporary replacement while a member of his current staff has been moved to his campaign re-election committee.
For example, using Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06) as an example … her Chief of Staff Julie Quist temporarily left her Congressional assignment to work on Ms. Bachmann’s re-election campaign late in 2008 … but returned afterward … during the time that she was not on the Congressional Staff, Ms. Quist was paid as a campaign consultant by the Bachmann campaign committee. However when she returned to the Congressional staff, Ms. Quist received a one-time payroll adjustment of $6,250 … in essence, it would appear that the taxpayers paid for her lost wages. Under the MRA rules, Ms. Bachmann controls how and who she pays.

It’s funny that the winner in the second week of the Republican YouCut program was to eliminate federal pay raises. Just makes you wonder what good it would do to eliminate pay raises, when members of Congress seem to spend our monies with so much freedom.

MN-02 : Does Harvard Study Prove Kline Right About Earmarks ?

A case study in logic, goes something like this :

John Kline is a human being.
Women are human beings.
Therefore, John Kline is a woman.

If you accept that logic, then consider this ...

John Kline opposes earmarks since they “are based on a member's seniority, committee assignment or party affiliation.”
A Harvard study states that obtaining a chairmanship on a “powerful congressional committee” actually damages corporations within the states that receive these federal dollars.
Therefore, John Kline’s opposition to earmarks benefits Minnesota.

In both examples, the logic is faulty.

Yet, that is the assessment suggested in a recent Letter to the Editor proclaiming that “A new Harvard Business School study shows how John Kline’s “no earmark” policy benefits Minnesota.”

I am not sure if the writer read the Do Powerful Politicians Cause Corporate Downsizing?
report, but its basic question was “Does public sector spending complement or crowd out private sector economic activity?”
John Kline is not mentioned ... nor is his "no earmark" policy ... in fact Minnesota is barely a sidenote.

The report analyzed over 42 years of earmarks and various changes of committee chairman and determined that corporations in those states invested less in their business than they may have otherwise.
But what does that mean ?
Well, the report states … “a key feature of our data is that firm-level figures reflect capex, R&D, payout, employment, and sales growth aggregated across all operations of the firm, including divisions located in other states. … To the extent that portfolio capital has greater mobility across states than across countries, the impact of fiscal stimulus may be weaker at the state level than the national level.”
Further, the report states : “This suggests the crowding out of private investment is particularly pronounced in industries operating at a high level of capacity where competition for additional factors of production including facilities and specialized capital is expected to be strong.”
My interpretation : if labor and resources are constrained in one state, a company may increase in another state … thus the corporation may grow in total, but not necessarily in the state that received federal funds. Hence one of the reasons why the military industrial complex has operations in virtually every state … when “labor gets tight”, they can re-align.

The report concludes : “Our results demonstrate that the average firm retrenches in the face of government spending shocks, but it is certainly possible (and perhaps likely) that some individual firms do in fact benefit from these spending shocks.”

The report uses as an example that Alabama had not had a chairman of a powerful committee until Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) came into power. For example, Shelby’s $15 million earmarks went specifically to the construction of housing and facilities for lower income families … the result was that another Alabama company that produced prefabricated homes saw a decline in activity.
Now, is that bad ?
Do you want mobile homes in your community or brick and mortar homes … plus the mobile home business has had significant changes in profitability and demand caused by a number of other factors (most notably interest rates), so it is difficult to know what the demand in Alabama would have been without Shelby’s earmark.

What the report really confirmed is something that has been widely reported – the largest of recipients of earmarks are Hawaii, Alaska, Mississippi, West Virginia, and Alabama: All states which had powerful congressional chairmen over the sample period.

Thus the problem is not earmarks, but that certain individuals look first and foremost to their state and not to the overall country.

It’s the people that are the problem … not necessarily the earmark process. Yes, so Richard Shelby (R-AL) is a problem … there are many examples that taxpayers should be concerned. Senate appropriator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). then-Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), and Robert Byrd (D-WV) have created imbalances.
But if I think of long-serving Senators that could impact this situation, I think of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, Democrats representing Massachusetts and John McCain and John Kyl, Republicans representing Arizona. In terms of earmark dollars, Massachusetts comes in at 27 yet based on population it should be 13 ( in effect a negative 14) while Arizona is #25 in terms of earmark dollars and #21 in population (a negative 4) … so there are examples of Senators that are not abusing the system. FYI : Minnesota is #37 in earmark dollars while #20 in terms of population ( and coming in second to Indiana as having the worst relationship.)

Returning back to the LTE writer’s assessment, NO, Mr. Kline’s “no earmark” policy DOES NOT benefit Minnesota … if Alabama is not building mobile homes, that does not mean that Minnesota is.
What it does mean is that certain states are getting more federal investment than we are.

The real question is : Is there a better way to ensure that the dollars are invested for the greatest need and purpose ?

John Kline’s “no earmark” policy does not address that … in some ways, the analogy would be that Honor Students are punished when other students abuse the system … the report clearly shows that Minnesota is not abusing the system, yet our dollars are helping other states.

There are some better approaches.
When will the Republicans put some serious fiscal conservatives like Jeff Flake (R-AZ) on the Appropriations Committee ? He has been repeatedly rejected by GOP leadership yet that would be the first step in stopping wasteful government spending.
How about rotating committee assignments, so that no one holds a committee chairmanship for longer than two years ?
How about a maximum amount that any Senator or Representative can request ?
How about getting Senate Republicans to reach agreement with House Republicans on what their earmark policy will be ? Who will control Senators Shelby, Cochran, et al ?
How about Enhanced Rescission Authority legislation ?

Or, something that Mr. Kline could do without the Republican Party approval … following the Tim Walz Transparency process … request input from constituents … give a hard review … and then report back what you will recommend.

But doing nothing, is just that … Mr. Kline your “no earmark” policy does nothing.

All that said, Mr. Kline has opposed earmarks that benefit Minnesota, yet he has been a strong supporter of earmarks that the Pentagon does not want … C-17 cargo plane, F-22 fighter, F-18 fighter, or even alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.

In the end, let’s ask Mr. Kline : How will your crusade change the process ?

Kline or Walz : Who Sides with the Pentagon and Taxpayers ?

Based on the years in the military, one would think that John Kline (R-MN-02) and Tim Walz (D-MN-01) would support the Pentagon requests … but do they ?

NO.

And what about protecting the taxpayers from unnecessary government spending ?

NO.

Actually, one does support the Pentagon and the taxpayer while one does not.

Actually, it is striking how different they are.
One is very public about professing the evils of wasteful government spending as a political election tool … only to vote (repeatedly) for “earmark” spending requested by members of his political party.
While the other promotes transparency and seeks input from his constituents for how federal dollars should be invested.

Both make monthly appearances on former First District Congressman Tim Penny’s radio program.
Being that Congressman Penny is currently Co-chair of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget Robert, so naturally the discussion focuses on government spending.

Friday it was Tim Walz turn on the air and the subject matter was the previous day’s vote on an amendment offered by Congresswoman Chellie M. Pingree (D-ME-01) to prohibit any further funding for the alternate F-35 engine.
Congresswoman Pingree stated : “ In 2001, Pratt & Whitney won the award for the primary engine for the Joint Strike Fighter through a competitive bidding process. This process was set up to save millions in taxpayer dollars. Since then, Congress has authorized an astonishing $1.3 billion of unrequested funds for the development of this extra unnecessary engine. The Bush administration opposed this program. The Obama administration opposes this program. And yet if this amendment fails today, we will continue to fund a defense program that is a complete waste of money.
I could not put it any better than the Secretary of Defense put it himself: Given the many pressing needs facing our military and the fiscal challenges facing our country, we cannot afford a ``business as usual'' approach to the defense budget. Tough choices must be made by both the Department and Congress to ensure that current and future military capabilities can be sustained over time. This means programs and initiatives of marginal or no benefit, like the F136 engine, are unaffordable luxuries.”

This amendment forces a vote on whether to support an “earmark” or as the Republicans have redefined it as a “ Programmatic Request ” since for political re-election purposes, the Republicans have announced a moratorium on “earmarks”.

At stake : $485 million dollars in the FY 2011 Department of Defense budget (or to put it in prospective, 53 jets can be built for the cost of the "extra" engine.)

The argument :
On one side is the DOD and the Bush and Obama Administration (The Marines, the Navy, and the Air Force have all said they don't want it) and the performance of the current engine (394 F-35 aircraft test flights planned in the schedule to occur during 2010 have been completed with sufficient results).
On the other side is the “loser” of the original award or as one Congressman said ”let me say how proud I am of the more than 4,000 Hoosier employees of Rolls Royce who worked to develop this engine.”

The result : Congressman Walz voted with the Pentagon’s and taxpayer’s interests while Mr. Kline voted with the special interests. Overall, the Democrats wanted to eliminate this unnecessary expenditure, but because of the strong support from the Republicans, the funding stayed in the bill.

Mr. Kline has a penchant for denouncing domestic spending via the “earmark” process yet fails to acknowledge unnecessary spending authorized through his House Armed Services Committee … be it comic books or seventeen F/A-18 E and F Super Hornet strike fighters, Mr. Kline has proven to be a strong representative for the military industrial complex but not for the taxpayers. On a previous Tim Penny broadcast, Mr. Kline defended his support for Mr. Bishop's (R-UT) "earmark" for F-22 planes as a "good jobs program".

For Minnesotans this is especially hard to see Mr. Kline "waste" our taxdollars. We are struggling ... our communities are delaying replacing police cars, yet Mr. Kline fully supports building unnecessary jets.

Walz Wants Input on Earmarks, Kline Lets Others Decide

Representative Tim Walz (MN-01) is requesting input on how our tax dollars should be spent.
Walz writes : “Each year, the appropriations process allows Members of Congress to solicit input and ideas from their constituents as to which local projects need federal funds. I intend to request funding this year for projects that will create jobs through investments in southern Minnesota and/or will have a transformative impact on the region.
While I continue to work with my colleagues to rein in the deficit and bring the budget into balance in Washington, it is important to note that Congressional earmarks do not add to the federal deficit. Any funds not reserved for specific projects through the Congressional earmark process would instead be left for federal bureaucrats in Washington to distribute, in accordance with federal law, as they see fit. I support an open, accountable, and transparent appropriations process because I think it is critically important that the people of southern Minnesota have a say in how their taxpayer dollars are spent in our community.
Below, you will see links to all of the qualified applications for federal funding I've received this year. I must make a decision on whether to request funding for each individual application very soon. Before I make my decision, I want to hear from you. ”

Tim Walz is a true Representative. He is not advocating shadowy spending where special interests get special attention. He wants to hear from all citizens. In fact, Walz goes on to encourage projects that will create jobs and have strong public support. Walz writes : “The more public support from local elected leaders, community officials, and from citizens in southern Minnesota project requestors can demonstrate for a project, the better the chance that I will submit it to the House Appropriations Committee for consideration.”
Further, he writes “I am also interested in projects that are eligible for federal funds through the appropriations process but will not require annual federal financial support to be successful.”
Lastly, he is not guaranteeing approval.

That’s a true Representative - open, responsive and concerned with how to best invest in the communities of southern Minnesota.
Contrast Representative Tim Walz, with John Kline in Minnesota’s Second District.
Mr. Kline, the “No” man who seems to be very comfortable in Washington Republican leadership has denounced Earmarks as a waste of tax dollars.
Kline wrote in 2008 “There is no accountability. Members of Congress are not even required to disclose to taxpayers what projects they have requested funding for.”

Although Representative Walz is not required, his website and press reporting lists all projects for voters to review the process. Walz writes : “To the best of my knowledge, I am the only Member of Congress who seeks public input on earmark applications before finalizing my request to the House Appropriations Committee. I am committed to this unprecedented transparency because I believe the best decisions are well-informed decisions.”

Why doesn’t Mr. Kline do that ?
After all, as Representative Walz stated “Any funds not reserved for specific projects through the Congressional earmark process would instead be left for federal bureaucrats in Washington to distribute, in accordance with federal law, as they see fit.”

It’s Mr. Kline’s failure to be involved in the appropriations process that has contributed to Minnesota being a donor state. The Tax Foundation rates Minnesota at the bottom - #46 writing : “Minnesota taxpayers receive less federal funding per dollar of federal taxes paid compared to the average state. Per dollar of Federal tax collected in 2005, Minnesota citizens received approximately $0.72 in the way of federal spending. This ranks the state 46th highest nationally and represents a decrease from 1995 when Minnesota received $0.78 per dollar of taxes in federal spending (44th highest nationally). Neighboring states and the amount of federal money they received per dollar of federal taxes collected were: North Dakota ($1.68), South Dakota ($1.53), Iowa ($1.10) and Wisconsin ($0.86).

Mr. Kline has taken a self-promoting political slant that he belongs to an elite group of 22 members of Congress that are opposing “earmarks”.

That type of elitism is bad for Minnesota. Mr. Kline could be as open, transparent and responsive as Representative Walz and investigate and promote projects that will grow jobs and improve Minnesota. Not all "earmarks" are wasteful government spending ... an effective Representative will make good decisions and spend our money wisely.

So, if you think that Highway 14 (Minnesota’s most deadliest highway) should be included in a federal appropriation, click here and tell Representative Walz (or any other project that might involve infrastructure investment such as water, sewer, road, etc.) … likewise, if you don’t think that a project should be included, I am sure that Representative Walz would want that input.

MN-02 : Kline on the Stimulus - Abject Failure

John Kline (R-MN-02) responded to a question on Tim Penny’s radio program on the effects of the stimulus calling it an “Abject Failure”.
The question did not have the follow-up that was required … namely why did it fail and who is at fault.
The answer is John Kline.

Why John Kline … well first, he voted For the failed economic stimulus and now is watching other districts begin to recover.

Yep, if the discussion is about an “Abject Failure” of an economic stimulus, then it should be no surprise that the Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act of 2008 was a BIG Failure. This was not a surprise as the Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated that H.R. 5140 would increase budget deficits by $152 billion in 2008 and by a net amount of $124 billion over the 2008-2018 period. You remember that stimulus complete with a $300 to $1200 rebate check … there was little complaining then … but fiscal conservatives warned of its flaws. Also not getting a lot of attention was the provisions that raised the loan limit (from $362,790 to $729,750) for the Federal Housing Administration’s (FHA’s) single-family program --- which no doubt eventually contributed to another piece of legislation that Kline supported. Yep, Kline voted For the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 which is better known as TARP.
The objective of Bush’s stimulus was a few pennies to regular people in hopes that they would spend coupled with Tax Breaks for business. However, there was no incentive for the business to take immediate action. Business may elect to wait until customer activity picks up before deciding to increase employment or investment in equipment/facilities … hence it failed and a new stimulus was initiated by President Obama.

Now, that Obama is president, Kline has now voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The Wall Street Journal accessed Obama’s stimulus as just starting out: Most of the stimulus spending so far has gone to state and local governments to plug holes in their schools, Medicaid and unemployment-benefits budgets. Spending on infrastructure projects is expected to pick up in 2010. About $180 billion of the funds allocated to various projects has been paid out. Tax cuts worth about $93 billion have also taken effect. An additional $320 billion in spending hasn't yet been handed out. A further $195 billion in tax cuts are due to flow through tax returns.

The Obama stimulus is working … as the NYT opined “There is virtually no dispute among economists that the stimulus prevented a bad recession from becoming much worse. Among other things, it has preserved or created 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs, according to various private sector analyses, and it is expected, ultimately, to add a total of roughly 2.5 million jobs.”

It’s way too early to call Obama’s stimulus an “Abject Failure” unless you reside in Minnesota’s Second District where John Kline is not getting any funding. Contrast the Second District with Tim Walz’s First District.
For example, the Recovery Act includes funding to help grow the emerging health IT industry which is expected to support tens of thousands of jobs ranging from nurses and pharmacy techs to IT technicians and trainers and South Central Technical College was awarded $4,506,101 . South Central President Keith Stover said "These new programs are designed to provide Southern Minnesota with the education necessary to achieve high-wage positions within the health care sector." Rep. Tim Walz said in a statement praising the funding "Not only will this funding create immediate jobs for program instructors, it will ensure that students and workers will have access to the training that will help them get high-paying jobs in new sectors of our economy."
That’s not the first time, South Central Technical College got grant money. WIRED (Workforce Innovation in Regional Economic Development) through the U.S. Department of Labor awarded $70,000 to fund the Shared Work Pilot Program.

And also this week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act announced that Southwest Minnesota Broadband Group (SWMBG), composed of the communities of Jackson, Lakefield, Windom, Round Lake, Bingham Lake, Brewster, Wilder, Heron Lake and Okabena, has been awarded $12.7 million in grant and loan funds to expand broadband Internet access in the region. The grant and loan combination along with private investment will provide high-speed Internet, voice and cable television to the participating communities.
These programs are available, but is Kline exercising any political effort to “stimulate” the Second District ? Voters in the Second District must look at the First District and wonder “why not us?”

Actually, he seems to be more concerned that Governor Pawlenty has planned to use federal monies to resolve the Minnesota budget problem. Kline said he may vote against the spending even if the governor needs it to balance the state budget. ‘‘There’s a big difference between opposing something and, once it becomes law, getting our share,’’ said Tom Hanson, Pawlenty’s main budget adviser.

Mr. Hanson, welcome to John Kline’s world … opposing Obama takes precedence over what Minnesotans need.
One observation that is becoming clearer every day is that John Kline's time in Congress has been an “Abject Failure” for the Second District.

MN-03 : Guest Blogger Erik Paulsen Misses Free Trade Opportunity

Using old data, Representative Erik Paulsen becomes a guest blogger on The Heritage Foundation website to advocate for free trade agreements.
Why, he didn’t included a copy on his personal blog is for others to question (but my guess would be that your collection basket will grow when you preach to the choir.)

Reading his piece, there are three immediate observations.

First, he cites “a Peterson Institute study, the average American household is about $9,000 per year richer as a result of the country’s integration with the world economy since World War II."
Call me skeptical, but why does Paulsen go back to WWII as his starting point ? First, Representative Paulsen fails to mention that the report was written in 2004 … which begs the question, is that comment still current today. The report was criticized for its selective use of data … and if the time frame was from ”1982 to the present (a time that saw the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the passage of permanent normal trading relations with China) added only $9 per U.S. household, not $9,000.” Reading the study cited, speaks significantly about the impact of China … somewhat making the WWII reference point inappropriate when the focus should be on the future and not the past. Also, Paulsen fails to acknowledge other comments cited in the Peterson study related to job and/or wage losses : “Manufacturing workers dislocated in trade-impacted industries also experience average wage declines of about 13 percent in their new jobs, losses that may be offset only partially by the lower prices they pay for imports.”
Representative Paulsen should be embarrassed for using a report that misleads the reader.

Second, Representative Paulsen promotes the benefits of free trade on “countless businesses, small and large, ” mentioning ONLY one company in his district -- ”Bloomington-based Donaldson Incorporated, a leading manufacturer of air filtration systems and other industrial products.” No doubt that Donaldson is a great company … as testified by its global reach with 40 manufacturing facilities worldwide and an employee base in the 10,000 range …. hardly a small business. Paulsen fails to mention that one of business segments of Donaldson that was hit hard … “Sales decreased in the United States by 56.6 percent primarily as a result of a 50 percent decrease in Class 8 truck build rates and a 53 percent decrease in medium duty truck build rates by the Company's Customers over the prior year quarter.” … somehow the necessity to stabilize the automotive industry was not deemed appropriate to be acknowledged.

Third, Representative Paulsen calls for “Opening the South Korean market.” It’s not open ? --- Look around your house for items that are currently imported into America and no doubt you find some Korean built products. Year to date, South Korea has exported $25,747 million while American producers have sent $17,700 million to South Korea … repeatedly over time, America has been on the unfavorable side of the trade balance.

Summing it up, free trade is not necessarily fair trade.

All that stated, Representative Paulsen goal of generating jobs through foreign trade makes sense … but he has not identified a clear opportunity that would directly benefit Minnesota --- Cuba !

Opening export opportunities to Cuba is not a subject that Representative Paulsen should be unfamiliar. Prior to being elected to Congress, then State Representative Paulsen had the opportunity to vote on resolution in 2008 to that effect. The opportunity was stated that “under an ideal trade scenario, Minnesota farmers could enjoy at least $45 million in new exports annually; the state's total economic benefit would be nearly $92 million, including 900 new jobs.” These are opportunity dollars …. as “Minnesota is ideally positioned to benefit from the market opportunities that free trade with Cuba would provide, as trade restrictions succeed only in driving sales to competitors in other countries that have no such restrictions”.
When it came down to the vote, it was passed in the House by a vote of 86-9 … but State Representative Paulsen declined to state his opinion and abstained.
It must be noted that not only did Paulsen not want to confront this issue, but Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) vetoed despite having met with representatives of the Cuban government in Minnesota’s state capital and expressing to them that "he supported free trade and friendship with Cuba." …. Ah, that was before Presidential politics came in to Pawlenty’s mindset.

Today, the opportunity is more desperate for Minnesota’s agricultural industry. Minnesota Congressmen John Kline (R), Jim Oberstar(D), Collin Peterson (D) and Tim Walz (D) along with 60 other representatives have requested that the US Trade Representative to open export markets closed to US pork producers.

Additionally, Representative Paulsen has not joined 179 other co-sponsors of Representatives Bill Delahunt (D-MA) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) to support HR 874. The legislation would lift travel restrictions to Cuba for all Americans, restoring our right as citizens of the United States to travel freely.

Representative Paulsen, if you want to create new jobs in Minnesota, start with supporting your fellow Congressmen’s efforts to open Cuba for American business opportunities. Cuba could be a rare opportunity for America to actually have a trade surplus with net job gains.

Walz Calls for Town Hall Meetings - So should Kline

Being honest with the public is the best policy. Sometimes the subject can be contentious and the public ill-informed … that’s why members of Congress need to reach out to their constituents and educate them.

First District Congressman Tim Walz (D-MN) has never shied away from engaging with his constituents … long before this summer’s Town Hall hysterics, Representative Walz had open forums discussing Veterans issues, Senior issues, Agriculture issues, etc. … issues that directly affected his constituents. During the current health care debate, Representative Walz has held private meetings with interested groups as well as tele-town hall meetings and open meetings in Mankato and Rochester.

Second District Congressman John Kline (R-MN) has shied away from open meetings only holding one during his first three terms and finally after the August recess, Representative Kline held his only public meeting to present his opposition to the HR 3200 healthcare legislation at Lakeville South High School on September 18th.

Healthcare reform is not the only critical question facing the country … and not the only one that has long-term financial impacts.

Representative Walz appeared on MPR’s Midday program stating that Americans should be as engaged in the discussion about the war in Afghanistan as they are in health care reform.
Further Representative Walz put it in perspective of dollars, families and our future : “We spent $900 billion in the last eight years, we've sent over 4,000 of our warriors that didn't return, we've got another 20,000 severely wounded and this is a choice that this nation's going to have to think very carefully about."

Representative Walz wants to hold a Town Hall meeting to discuss Afghanistan … possibly in Winona in October.
That’s why I like Congressman Walz. He wants our input.

Representative Walz will not be coming into the meeting as a partisian blind supporter of the Department of Defense’s viewpoint. Walz has had on-the-ground vantage of seeing operations in action (and without a kelvar vest). At the invitation of the House Armed Services Committee, Representative Walz, who sits on the Veterans Affairs Committee, inspected Special Forces training operations in Mali, Kenya, Djibouti, and Afghanistan, from August 27 to September 3rd.
Representative Walz will be able to educate us and also be able to react to our concerns.

Regardless of the party of the President, this time it is not going to be a partisain issue. Now that Bush’s War has turned into Obama’s War, I suspect that some of the fiscal conservatives that opposed the military involvement in Kosova during the Clinton Administration, will take a harder look today. Former Congressman Gil Gutknecht opposed Kosova and after his visit to Iraq expressed concern of that mission. Columnist George Will has called to pull out of Afghanistan. (On that suggestion, I agree with Representative Walz who has expressed doubt that anti-terrorist operations can be conducted solely by remote controlled Predator drones and spy planes.)

Let’s commend Congressman Walz … but he is not the only member of the Minnesota delegation that has responsibility for military oversight.

According to his bio, Representative Kline considers himself to have “established himself as one of Congress’s foremost experts on defense and veterans issues.” Representative Kline serves on the House Armed Services Committee and in April, 2009, he made his third trip to Afghanistan.

While Representative Walz has maintained an open mind, Representative Kline, in a radio interview on the AM 1170 KOWZ, expressed his staunch commitment for the engagement in Afghanistan. But Representative Kline has failed to address the financial impacts of the ongoing war. On a previous program, Representative Kline defended his support for an earmark for funding additional F-22A planes as a “jobs program” … without acknowledging that the plane has not been used in the Iraq or Afghanistan conflict … and that the Department of Defense does not feel any more need to be built.
Representative Kline has been a vocal critic of earmarks … but his words do not match his vote. The DOD authorization is chockfull of projects that DOD does not want … including VH-71 presidential helicopter, an alternative engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, extra C-17 transport planes and F-18 jets, as well as the Kinetic Energy Interceptor, a missile defense program.

It’s time that Representative Kline holds a Town Hall meeting to discuss Afghanistan and why he voted for these earmarks. Kline needs to educate the voters and get his constituents’ input.

GOP Not Serious About Earmarks; Dems Not Serious About Reform

Congress is back !
While some things stay the same, other things change … and not for the better.

Oh, sure there are plenty of new faces --- each with unbridled optimism and good intentions. Alas, their first reaction must be … did you guys run last November ?
For those voters that thought that change would be in order, must now be seriously disappointed. In Minnesota, all the House incumbents were re-elected … but what changes will really happen ?

In the House on Republican side, Minnesota has returned John Kline and Michele Bachmann.
Kline’s major theme of his re-election was Stop the Pork while Bachmann is also on a pork-free diet. So, did the Republicans heed their campaign motto ? NO.
Pork can be best controlled through the Appropriations Committee which directs all federal discretionary spending. I have never heard Kline or Bachmann openly campaign for assignment to this committee. With Democrats increasing their overall numbers in the House, the Appropriations Committee ratio changed from 37-29 in the 110th Congress to 37-23 in the 111th, leaving Republicans with only two seats to fill after accounting for retirements and election losses. Of course, they could have re-assigned existing members including dishonored Jerry Lewis (R-CA) but that change is rarely made. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) who is an outspoken critic of wasteful government spending openly campaigned for a seat last session and for this new session. IF the Republicans wanted to stop the pork, they would have made sure that Flake got that assignment. Alas, the new members will be Tom Cole (R-OK) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH). Word is that Cole was promised the assignment in exchange for stepping down as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (no Blagojevich buy-out here).
Minnesota’s newly elected Erik Paulsen (MN-06) has been assigned to the House Financial Services Committee where Bachmann has served.
So, on the Republican side, Minnesota has lost its voice in the powerful Ways and Means Committee with the retirement of Jim Ramstad. Republicans filled six slots - Charles Boustany Jr. (LA); Ginny Brown-Waite (FL); Geoff Davis (KY); Dean Heller (NV); Dave Reichert (WA); and Peter Roskam (IL).
Voters were sold a “pig in the poke” with Kline and Bachmann’s ranting … they have started off this session exhibiting their failures to motivate their colleagues … all the while the grandstanding continues for voter’s obfuscation. Kline issues press releases while Bachmann editorializes about limestone sidewalks, skateboard parks and bike lanes. No doubt we will hear about these “earmarks” thoughout the session, yet they have failed to take the necessary action by making real change in committee assignments.
The GOP is playing us for suckers again.

And the Democrats are not starting out well either.
In the House, the Rules have been changed. Term limits on committee chairs have been changed while the “Pay-go” rules which required spending proposals to be balanced with revenue or cuts, have been gutted.

While Kline and Bachmann are pseudo-deficit spending and "anti-pork-barrel" politicians, Minnesotans in the First District remember a true fiscal conservative – Tim Penny. When Penny was in the House, he formed the Democratic Budget Group and when his party failed to reduce the federal deficit, he did not seek re-election. Penny saw the hypocrisy and excessive partisanship first hand. He wrote a book entitled Common Cents: A Retiring Six-Term Congressman Reveals How Congress Really Works--And What We Must Do to Fix it which he denounces the rules that make chairmen too powerful. Penny was right then and the Republicans changed those rules under the guise of the "Contract With America”. After the lessons of Tom Delay, Duke Cunnningham, John Doolittle, Jerry Lewis, and Rick Renzi just to name a few dishonored Republicans, the Democrats are reverting to the old rules just when Charlie Rangel (D-NY) ethics problems are being investigated. Rangel chairs the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. It was a good move when Henry Waxman (D-CA) took over for John Dingell (D-MI) as chairman of the influential Committee on Energy and Commerce. Failure to allow younger members like Tim Walz (D-MN-01) and Keith Ellison (D-MN-05) to assume responsibilities opposes the opportunities for change.

Walz should be angered by the relaxing of Pay-go rules as his votes last session clearly embraced that philosophy, and was a major theme in his election campaigns.

Somehow, I suspect that Penny, who must still be smarting over the over half a million in federal funds that was slipped into the 1991 budget at the last moment to preserve and enshrine Lawrence Welk's boyhood home in Strasburg, N D (pop. 623), must see that nothing has changed has changed in over a decade since he left Congress.

{NOTE : on the Senate side, the major committees that will impact spending include : Appropriations Committee - Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a four seat advantage. On the Senate Budge Committee, Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a three seat advantage. Franken may be in-line for a seat on the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee where the Democrats have a one seat advantage. The Coleman legal challenge is impacting Minnesotans from having input on shaping our fiscal future.}

Coach Walz Call a Time-out !

Good news, Coach Walz … the Scarlets of Mankato West are returning to the Minnesota State High School League Championship Game. This will be the school’s fourth appearance, and is vying for their third championship, winning Prep Bowl titles in 1999 and 2002.

Obviously, this is a great source of pride for the student-athletes, school officials and the community at large. But everything must be kept in perspective. You’ll recall when you were involved with the team that the key was to keep focused on the job at hand … not dream about the future.

It’s easy to project that high school star going to NCAA Division I-FCS college and to dream of a professional career. But the let’s keep everything in perspective. Does it happen – sure – my high school never lost a football game in four years and every senior was offered a college scholarship … one of my classmates went on to become a QB at Purdue and was drafted by the Colts … but my high school may be the exception (even though there are not many that can claim a Heisman Trophy winner and Super Bowl MVP as their alumni.) But my high school coaches were smart … they recognized that not everybody could get to the highest level so most of the schools were not Big Ten but smaller schools … some declined the opportunity to play football … but they had an offer if they wanted it.
Sometimes it’s just nice to be considered as their talents might lead them to another career … as another kid from my high school went on to serve as a member of Congress and even visited Minnesota as a guest of then-Congressman Tim Penny.
Sometimes a multi-talented individual has a talent but that actually is bested developed and expanded upon, and not switching to other areas.

So Coach, it’s time for Congressman Walz to call a time-out and squelch these stories that he is being urged “to consider running for Governor in 2010.”

Congressman Walz, I voted for you to represent the First District in Congress. That’s the job that needs your full focus … and a job that you are good at. Politics and policy can be at crossroads … they sometimes connect but too often, people like to speculate about “who should run for this job” … and obviously, it’s nice to be recognized … but your talents are needed in Congress.
At the Federal level, Congress can impact our lives significantly --- positively as well as negatively.
At the State level, the impact is small as a balance budget prohibits making major policy changes … hence as Governor Pawlenty’s $86 million "Green Jobs Investment Initiative" may be a “good idea”, it will face the question of balancing “financial resources”. As will his 21st Century Tax Reform Committee … as will his Teacher Quality proposal, or his plan to revamp health care by permitting access to online personal health portfolios.
Sure some aspect of these programs may be implemented, but it’s like playing football at NCAA Division III … the opportunities are limited by the budget. Congress is NCAA Division I-FCS … it’s the game you want to play in.

The players are different … and there are plenty of “candidates” in the state legislature that appear to be willing to step up. Let them play … stay in Washington and provide them the assistance the Federal Government should provide. That’s the best way to serve the people of Minnesota. Please stay focused on the job at hand … let others dream about the future.

Durenberger goes Country First suggesting Walz for Senate

There’s a growth that can be seen in many politicians that is rarely exhibited while in office. When first elected, it seems to be Party First but after they are out of office, or face a defeat, the spirit of compromise and bipartisanship produces a Country First veiwpoint. Nationally, look at John McCain after his 2000 Presidential defeat or Trent Lott after losing his Majority Leader position.

In Minnesota, former U.S. Sen. Dave Durenberger has been an underappreciated Country First voice of reason. In a 2006 commentary, Durenberger’s efforts on behalf of Minnesota Citizens Forum on Health Care Costs was cited. Durenberger continues to nudge our state’s elected leaders on health care writing recently “Governor Tim Pawlenty, like most Republican legislators, believed the key to improving value was getting working families to "put more financial skin in the game" by making them buy high deductible indemnity insurance outside the employer market. What he has apparently come to understand is that is putting the cart before the horse - making people pay for stuff they don't really understand. That may work in cosmetic surgery, or lasik surgery for your golf game, or to create markets for retail clinics and urgi-centers. It doesn't for the 15% of the chronic or potentially terminally ill cases that currently generate 82% of the healthcare costs in Minnesota.

Durenberger expressed his support of Barack Obama for President and suggested that Coleman is pushing health care reform that we need - and can pass in giving his endorsement in this year’s Senate race.

Today, Amy Klobuchar and Durenberger discussed the 2008 election results and their implications, at an event sponsored by the Minneapolis Club and the Minneapolis Foundation.

Durenberger praised Klobuchar for her first 22 months in office which wasn’t a surprise since he written in his e-newsletter that “she has a record of performance both with Democrats and Republicans which make her a most successful and influential Democrat from Minnesota. He stated that Norm Coleman shared his assessment.

Durenberger was not as kind to candidate Al Franken who he describes as a totally committed liberal Democrat that we don’t know how he would perform in the US Senate. Durenberger went on to state that the DFL had not offered their strongest challenger and suggested First District Congressman Tim Walz.
That’s an assessment that I shared after hearing Walz in a debate and realized that he would be a more effective voice in the Senate than Senator Coleman. For the record, this election was too important for me to “waste my vote” on someone who couldn’t win … so Mr. Franken got my vote, but it was certainly reinforcing to hear that somebody that puts Country First recognizes Congressman Walz’s potential.
After all, with Country First people, we don’t ask about political party.
Minnesota and the country need more people like Dave Durenberger.

Is one Minnesota Congresswoman going too far to say Thank You ?

Following Tim Walz election victory in November, 2006, he launched a “Thank You” tour of cities – large and small -- throughout the First District. The New Ulm Journal wrote : “The common-sense, pragmatic people of southern Minnesota are ones you should look to on what they’re going to do so I’m honored to be your representative there,” Walz told a gathering of about 60 in the Grand Hotel. “We won, and for that I’m incredibly proud. So, it was a great day the other night. Electoral politics still works in America. This is still the best democracy in the world. It doesn’t matter what you were up against. The people here in this country decided they wanted to see a change, and each and every one of you did everything possible to make that change. It wasn’t for yourselves; it was for those future generations.”

That tour wasn’t the last time that voters would see Congressman Walz … sure he was there when there was a natural disaster … but he was also there at Hy-Vee groceries stores throughout the District – talking with citizens regardless if they voted for him. He also held hearings in the District on the Farm Bill, legislation for seniors and legislation for Veterans. That’s why Walz was overwhelmingly re-elected winning every county and taking 678 out of 749 precincts.

There is another member of Congress who is about to go on her own “Thank You” tour.
The Star-Tribune reports : Sponsored by the Jewish Community Relations Council, the trip will be what a Bachmann staffer referred to as “just your basic educational Israel trip.” The excursion will last for all of next week, but she isn’t expected to meet with any VIPs while there.
So, why is Congresswoman Bachmann taking another trip to Israel ?

Could it be to make a formal “Thank You” to her contributors … which have earned Bachmann a slot in the Top Ten of PAC Contributions in 2008.

Taking junkets to Israel to develop some future business for Minnesota firms is cited by Governor Tim Pawlenty as his reason for taking a Jewish Community Relations Council trip. Considering Israel and America have been active trading partners, it may not be an earth shattering event … as would be a Pawlenty mission to Cuba (which Govenor Ventura did and considering a new Obama Administration, it is more likely to develop new Minnesota businesses opportunties first.)

But Bachmann’s reasoning - “just your basic educational Israel trip” - just doesn’t make sense … . In August of 2007 Bachmann went on a privately funded trip sponsored by the America Israel Education Federation (AIEF) to Israel. On that trip, she met with foreign leaders.
How many trips does the Congresswoman need to take to get “just your basic education”?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she hopes Congress can return this month to approve spending measures to stimulate the depressed economy. The election campaign may be an excuse for Congresswoman Bachman to miss Congressional hearings regarding the roll of Congress in the failure to regulate credit default swaps. But there is no excuse for not being there after the election. Of course, if Bachmann had attended the hearing, she may have learned that her misguided blaming of Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) as being the driving force for the credit crisis with her allegation that "loans started being made on the basis of race, and often on little else" was refuted. There are three reasons to exonerate the Community Reinvestment Act in the mortgage meltdown:
• The CRA applies to banks. Most subprime mortgages came from lenders that were not banks -- so the CRA did not cover them.
• The nonbank lenders made more reckless lending decisions than banks did.
• Regulations didn't drive the subprime lending boom. The pursuit of profits did.
But then again, we don’t know what “Thank You" tour, Congresswoman Bachmann has for her contributors from the Banking Industries.

When voters went to the polls last week, the message was loud and clear --- we want action … and Bachmann is enjoying junkets.

In MN, House more important than US Senate vote

Last year when I wrote a Vote 60 commentary, my assessment that Minnesota will not be a factor in the Electoral College this time is proven to be correct.
However, I have come to change what part of this year’s ballot is most important.
It's not the US Senate, but the House.

Although I am still concerned with the rules of the Senate that allow for Holds and Filibusters, I believe the next Senate will be more bi-partisan. The 2008 elections put a number of Senators, like Norm Coleman, in a position of trying to work with the Democrats and the 2010 class looks like the Republicans will be in a similar position. Of the seats up for election, 19 are held by Republicans and 15 by Democrats. Of the Democrat seats, none may be lost while Arizona (McCain), Iowa (Grassley), Kentucky (Bunning), Louisana (Vitter), and Ohio (Voinovich) could have challenges. Of those, McCain, Grassley and Voinovich are most likely to join Maine’s Senators Collins and Snowe on select issues (job creation, climate change, etc.)

No, the most important choice Minnesota voters will make on Tuesday is who will represent you in the House.
The critical issue is the economy and what will government do to improve it?
What tax policy will be put in place?
Will some be asked to pay more or will services be cut?

These are critical questions with unemployment hovering in the 6% range, consumers not spending resulting in lower sales tax revenues, and a housing and stock market collapse. The result is a budget shortfall approaching $2 billion dollars (although some project it could be $4 billion.)

Obviously, I am referring to the Minnesota House.

Who does your next representative want to support ?
Being in southern Minnesota, my focus has been on the 24B (Tony Cornish and John Branstad) although the candidates in the 21B (Paul Torkelson and Bob Skillings) and 24A (Bob Gunther and Dale Hansen) seem to have the same approach to the issue.

Cornish approach is clear.
"What it is, is a problem when - if the state has less money coming in - we have to find some place to cut," Cornish told the Fairmont Sentinel. "Just like the county is going to have less money coming in. They're going to have to disappoint people. In the lack of the state's ability to print money, when we get shorted in our revenue ... what other choice do we have to cut? As far as transportation, we just passed a gas tax. The last thing in the world we're going to look at is more revenue for transportation."

Branstad, agrees that finding a funding solution will be difficult but has a more realistic, long-term view telling the Mankato Free Press “Cuts aren’t made without repercussions. It is going to be a very challenging environment. When you have limited pie, any increase or decrease for one piece has an impact on another piece.”

Well said, Mr. Branstad … it’s how the pie will be cut.
And Mr. Cornish, what a cavalier attitude that embraces "going to have to disappoint people" instead of how to serve people.

Governor Pawlenty has tipped his hand as to how he wants the pie cut when he established the 21st Century Tax Reform Commission which is reviewing how to improve Minnesota business competitiveness. Pawlenty has already asked all state agencies to submit budgets cutting expense 5% which equates to $2 billion.
Anyone willing to take the bet that Representatives Cornish, Torkelson and Gunther would follow the party line and give tax cuts for business and cut existing state programs ?
[I wish the slogan “Country First” was more evident in Minnesota where it appears to be “Party First”.]

As Minnesota faces the implications of this financial crisis, the next Congress will be asked to support the states. In fact, even though this is campaign season, the US House of Representatives has held a number of hearings and may bring forward a $100 billion economic stimulus package to the floor during a lame-duck session the week of Nov. 17. Democratic leadership indicate that it might include "federal matching funds for state Medicaid programs, an extension of unemployment benefits, expanded food stamp spending and money for infrastructure projects" in the package.
An October 2008 survey of public transportation agencies by the American Public Transportation Association identified 559 ready-to-go transit projects at a total cost of $8.03 billion meaning construction jobs starting within 90 to 120 days.

That’s the key. The federal government will want the states to participate.
When I heard Congressman Tim Walz on the radio endorsing John Branstad for 24-B, it was evident that Congressman Walz knows the problems facing Minnesotans and wants members in the state legislature that will work with Congress.

A vote for Branstad and Walz is not a vote for party politics, but for progress for Minnesota.

(Note: The next US House of Representatives will have a dominate Democrat slant including the possibility of an increase in Minnesota delegation. Voters in Minnesota’s Second District and Sixth District have a choice of embracing Republicans John Kline and Michele Bachmann who have not supported the earmark process that determine those ready-to-go transit projects or Democrats Steve Sarvi and El Tinklenberg who will address jobs and infrastructure improvents.)