Politics in Minnesota: The Weekly Report, Vol. 4, Issue 8 - 8/15/2008
Pelowski Proceeds: Legislative Reform Suggestions Released
This morning, the House Government Operations, Reform, Technology and Elections Committee under its chair, Rep. Gene Pelowski (DFL-Winona) released its recommendations on reforming the structure and operations of the state Legislature. As we reported earlier this summer, Pelowski's committee has been working on it since last June. The new report [.pdf] features many ideas offered back in April by Brenda Erickson of the National Conference of State Legislatures, as well as the those offered on June 23rd by Geoff Bartsch of the Minnesota Government Relations Council. Additionally, the MGRC's committee structure recommendations are here. [.pdf]
Overall, many of these are common-sense measures that would enable legislators to focus more on their committees, reduce time-consuming and redundant procedures, speed along floor debate, increase transparency for the public, lock in a more well-planned schedule, bump up the budget forecast and discourage omnibus policy bills. The minority caucus would get certain benefits, such as assurances that "priority bills" would be heard, and more hearings of their bills in committee.
If the recommendations got implemented, a lot of the typical time-wasting, fruitless maneuvers that eat so much House floor time would vanish, and legislators wouldn't be spread so thin on their numerous committees. Those two areas alone would dramatically change life for House members.
There are 29 recommendations for committee structure and procedures, 21 for floor procedures, eight for conference committees, five for end-of-session, five for public access and participation, five for modifying the budget targets, forecasts and fiscal year timing, and 12 about schedules, organization and other issues.
There are a lot of suggestions about making more information available on the legislative websites, and even making certain time intervals between Web posting and legislative action mandatory. This seems like a remarkable shift in emphasis towards technology, which would certainly make the process much more accessible and predictable to members of the public, the media and lobbyists. Essentially, posting to the House website would become a pillar of the process.
It's an extensive report, so we'll summarize a few of the more interesting points and the proposed language for the House rules.
Committee structure and organization:
- House and Senate committees should match up more closely, there should be more joint committees and hearings, and there should be fewer committees in the first place. Their jurisdictions should be described in detail, and all committees should have jurisdiction over both policy and finance. Total bill introductions per member would be limited and there would be an annual deadline for bill introductions.
- Bills, or portions of bills, could be referred to multiple committees simultaneously and their considerations could be limited to matters only within their jurisdiction.
- Members could designate at least one "priority bill" they've authored each session and the committee chairs would have to schedule a hearing for them, if there is a Senate companion bill.
- There would have to be a better way to publicize agendas, preferably by the prior Thursday. Amendments would only be in order if they've been publicized in advance, with some exceptions.
- Hearings shouldn't be scheduled for bills until at least two days after they've been introduced.
- Committees should do most of the work on bills and they shouldn't get heavily worked on on the House floor.
- Omnibus budget bills should only contain budget-related material, and policy language shouldn't be in finance bills.
- Finance and tax committees shouldn't act on bills before receiving fiscal and revenue notes.
- Amendments would have to be released ahead of time (including on the Internet) and not allowed to annex other bills. There are some conflicting recommendations: amendments would only be in order if they'd already been offered (and rejected) in committee, or else it would not be in order if already rejected in committee.
- The Rules committee would have more power over designating what amendments can be offered, "at least for certain bills."
- Finally containing those endless debates, there would be "aggregate time limits" for all amendments to a bill.
- Bills should get referred back to committee more often, rather than taking on major changes and delete-all amendments from the floor.
- Floor amendments proposing constitutional amendments should be out of order, unless a constitutional amendment is already in the bill.
- Bills should be considered in the order they're published, and debate on individual bills should be limited to an hour for most, and two hours for major bills. Debate time available should go to caucuses based on the percentage of House members in each caucus.
- The House website should have Senate amendments to House bills posted online for 24 hours before a motion to concur can be in order.
- Bills should be on the General Register for at least two days before it can be considered.
- No more meetings after midnight and floor sessions should be scheduled to better match scheduled committees.
- Floor motions to consider the constitutionality of bills and amendments would be in order; the whole House could vote on whether proposals are constitutional.
- The rule banning members from speaking twice on a subject should be enforced, and they should not speak more than once until every other member wishing to speak has had an opportunity to do so.
- The House should help minority members get their bills heard in committee and on the floor, "in part because this likely will tend to limit the number of amendments offered on the House floor."
- It should be possible to let bills pass between the House and Senate more than once.
- Conference committees should be scheduled with enough advance notice for the public to participate, and they should have to accept public testimony, especially when entirely new language materializes in conference.
- Conference committee reports should always be available to the public for at least 12 hours before consideration.
- More standing joint committees would reduce the need for conference committees.
- There should be a time set aside at the end of session for making corrections.
- More key decisions should be made "in public meetings by more groups of legislators, rather than being negotiated in private meetings between the governor and legislative leadership."
- End of session agreements should be made more in advance so that everyone has a chance to review them.
- There should be deadlines for giving targets to the key budget conference committees, or let the full House and Senate vote on the targets.
- The public should be better able to track language changes between bills and track individual bills going into omnibus bills.
- There should be more hearings away from the Capitol, and possible interim "mini-sessions" in Greater Minnesota.
- Legislative information should be more centralized.
- The state fiscal year should be changed to the calendar year used by local governments, and the biennial budget cycle should start on July 1st of even-numbered years.
- The House and Senate should jointly agree on budget targets before the committee deadline for major revenue and finance bills.
- The budget forecasts should be released earlier.
- Committee chairs should say "no" more often to reduce "time spent on matters that are not likely to advance."
- Omnibus policy bills should be discouraged.
- More practices should be codified in the House Rules; the House should "rely less on Mason's Manual."
- The caucuses' leadership should meet early to agree on a structure and schedule for major parts of the session.
- The House should have meetings after the election and before the session for organizational purposes (which would require a constitutional amendment).
- Meetings on Monday mornings, Friday afternoons and evenings should be limited in order to be more family friendly, and the House should better take into account the time demands upon members with other jobs.
- Interim meetings should be clustered around certain weeks, with at least two weeks notice.
- Policy committee deadlines should be set later and executive agencies should get their bills drafted by the Revisor earlier.
- The Minnesota Constitution should have the 120 legislative day limit removed still maintaining the January-May time frame.
The results of bipartisan efforts led by Pelowski look very useful, and if carried out, would certainly let the public into many stages of the process that currently happen without prior announcements. Lobbyists would appreciate having fewer committees to track, more logically defined. Legislators would finally get windows of time to evaluate bill amendments, and hopefully a less punishing schedule. It's a well-rounded array of proposals, and should give everyone something to smile about.
A Different Take On PLF's Late Entry To Candidacy
Last week we noted that some DFL loyalists were miffed at Priscilla Lord Faris' post-convention entry into the Senate race—and not just because she's launching serious attack ads against the party's endorsed candidate. They feel they should have gotten a chance to hear her positions earlier in the race; PIM thought she would have added an interesting voice to the contest between Al Franken, Mike Ciresi and Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer.
This week, though, we got an email from SCSU Scholar King Banaian that shed new light on our account of her campaign. He wrote us regarding a radio interview he and Michael Brodkorb held with Lord Faris on The Patriot a few weeks ago. In the interview, Lord Faris gave an account of her plans for candidacy that put a different spin on how she entered: she says that she'd originally planned to seek the endorsement at the DFL convention. Family issues, including the death of her brother, caused her to delay jumping into the race.
Bits & Pieces
Longtime public affairs guru and ex-Weber Shandwick VP Jake Reint has a new gig at Flint Hills Resources. During his over twelve years at Weber Shandwick as Vice President of Public Affairs, he represented the Prairie Island Indian Community, Mayo Clinic, the MOA Phase II and Manitoba Hydro, among others. He'll continue his outstanding work for Flint Hills as Director of Northern Tier Communications.
Tim Commers, Gov. Tim Pawlenty's 2002 campaign manager and three-term Republican Representative from Eagan, has joined ASI Communications. Commers was previously the owner of the direct-marketing mail operation, Capital Direct. We're sure that Tim's "button-down shirt and khaki pants" formula (from his ASI bio) will be a key to further success.
Barry Casselman's new book "Minnesota Souvenir: The 2008 Republican National Convention," continues his chronicle of politics and history of Minnesota. This time he features the history of the Republican Party in the state interwoven with the genesis of the national GOP (both were begun in the 1850's). Intended for visitors to the 2008 convention, as well as Minnesotans, the book also contains a section of restaurant recommendations (Casselman, in addition to his long-time coverage of Minnesota and national politics, is the dean of Twin Cities food critics), a section on Twin Cities museums and sights, as well as a bipartisan who's who of local think tanks, public affairs groups, political parties, media and blogs. "Minnesota Souvenir" is available at amazon.com, local bookstores or directly from the publisher by calling Pogo Press (which also published Casselman's "North Star Rising" in 2007) at 800-846-7027. The book is lavishly illustrated with political memorabilia from the past 150 years, with a special section on the 1892 GOP national convention in Minneapolis, the only other national convention held in Minnesota. Cover price for the book is $18.95.
Members of the public who feel their voices aren't being heard on the topic of tax reform now have a new way to reach the decision-makers in Minnesota government. Gov. Pawlenty's 21st Century Tax Reform Commission has a new public input email address at taxreformfeedback@state.mn.us. The commission meets twice monthly at the Department of Revenue and reminds citizens that public testimony is welcome at all meetings. More at the Commission's website.
New Aerie For Old St. Paul: On Wednesday, DFL St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman was on hand to celebrate completion of improvements to St. Paul's Lookout Park. That lovely corner of the world on Summit Avenue had been under renovation for quite some time, but now is enhanced with grass, gravel walkways, landscaping, benches, a drinking fountain and more. Take a trip to the park and see the New York Life Eagle, the 19th century bronze sculpture that topped the New York Life Insurance Company building in St. Paul until 1967.
Minnesota's Legislative Reference Library has some newly acquired State Government reports on topics ranging from petroleum product distribution to mosquito control. Check them out here.
PIM Blogger Interview: Shot In The Dark
By Peter Bartz-Gallagher
We continue our series of Weekly Report blogger interviews this week with Mitch Berg from St. Paul, who is an outstanding contributor to the conservative conversation.
Politics in Minnesota: First, how did the blog get started and what does 'Shot In The Dark' mean?
Mitch Berg: I got a brief taste of life as a pundit (albeit a Z-list one) when I was a talk show producer and weekend graveyard-shift host at KSTP in the 80s. I enjoyed arguing politics with strangers more than just about anything I'd ever done! But it ended, and life moved on, and I put all of that away for a while. I got married and had kids and started a few new careers - but all the while, that inner pundit was still in there, looking for a way out.
I'd been out of the business for fifteen years when blogs became available as a medium. I read about blogs in a Time magazine piece on Andrew Sullivan - and ran out to blogger.com and had the original Shot In The Dark going that very evening. It was February 5, 2002.
The name "Shot In The Dark" is a quadruple entendre. Beyond the obvious (I'm kinda winging it, as with most things in my life), it's a reference to my Second Amendment activism, an allusion to hope (a flash of light in a dark place) and, since it was five months after 9/11, a little bit of Jack Bauer-via-Walter Mitty swagger and/or wishful thinking. I didn't agonize over naming the blog much - I think I thought about it for all of thirty seconds - but it's served me well.
PIM: The conservative blog scene is composed of some very distinct voices and personalities. What do you add to the network?
MB: Compared to the "A" list conservative bloggers in town - Scott Johnson, John Hinderaker, Ed Morrissey - I'm probably a bit more varied; being smaller potatoes means I can get away with more! I cover music, pop culture, family life and whatever else grabs my fancy, along with all the news I can be bothered to print.
My blog is intermittently more personal, probably, too. To an extent, the blog is something I'm doing for my kids; there are bits and pieces in there that they can use to understand their Dad someday; that (and not, as some have suggested, galloping narcissism) is the motivation behind my "Twenty Years Ago Today" bit.
I'm also more locally-focused. Nobody cares what I think about South Ossetia or the national deficit, but if I write something about Saint Paul, someone might find a reason to read it.
What can I add? For whatever reason, I'm blessed to be either one of the biggest little conservative blogs in town, or one of the smallest big ones; either way, I'm in a good position to plug some of the less well-known local and regional blogs. There are some great blogs out there - Jay Reding, Heavy Handed Politics, Speed Gibson, Night Writer, Psycmeister's Ice Palace, Cake Eater Chronicles and too many others to mention right here - that in a just world would get ten times the traffic they do. A bunch of much bigger bloggers - Hugh Hewitt, Glen Reynolds, James Lileks, the Powerguys - helped put me on the map; I'd like to do my little bit to pass the favor on. There are some voices out there that need to be heard by more people.
That's why I brought JRoosh, formerly of RooshFive, on board as a co-blogger last month. After eighteen months of running one of the best small blogs in town, he decided to hang it up. I emailed him and said we couldn't have this; he needed to keep writing, and if that meant writing twice a week or twice a year on my blog, without the pressure of trying to build his own brand, then let's do it! His style is enough like mine that it just plain made sense, and I think Shot In The Dark and the local blog scene are better for it.
PIM: How does your experience in radio affect your blogging? How are radio and blogging similar or different?
MB: The big similarity is the imperative to engage an audience on some level. That usually means on some emotional level; people need to find something that resonates with them, positively or negatively, or they have no reason to come back. With a talk show, you get feedback on how engaged people are - via your ratings and from your phone lines. On a blog, if people never read you, or read you once or twice and never come back, you're not engaging them; your hit counts will show it.
The difference? Radio is business. Blogs - usually - aren't. The purpose of a radio show is to try to tap a market; people usually start blogs because of something inside them they want to get out - their experiences or ideas or delusions or life story - or whatever. There are as many motivations as there are bloggers.
PIM: What's the most pressing issue, in your mind, for Minnesota conservatives?
MB: Coming up with a message that wins over the undecided. The party needs to do what Ronald Reagan did nationwide in 1980, and what Brett Schundler did in Jersey City in 1992; find a way to channel Hayek and Friedman to undecided, ideologically-free-agent voters in a way that resonates; talking about school choice to inner city parents, about free enterprise to immigrants, and so on.
To me - as a Republican who lives in Saint Paul - the challenge is this; conservatism has to contest the cities. If the MN GOP continues to cede the Twin Cities to the DFL, basically without a fight, this state will never be anything but a sickly purple.
And the opportunity is there! The cities are full of people who "should be" conservatives; inner-city parents are the biggest advocates for school reform you will ever find; recent immigrants are frequently the biggest champions of free enterprise, often the most stolidly socially-conservative, and the hardest-liners on security and law-and-order. The DFL's response to that is "the Fourth and Fifth Districts have been DFL strongholds for fifty years." Which is true, but certainly not on the strength of their ideas or the delivery on their promises. What have they done for the city lately?
Let's just say it's a long-term project.
PIM: You wrote an interesting post recently ('The Two-way Sluice') dealing with the issue of 'contempt' between liberal and conservative viewpoints. Do you think blogs should be concerned with the goal of civic discourse as opposed to division between ideologies? Does your blog do this?
MB: I think we need to do both.
One of my favorite inventions on my blog was the metaphor of politics as a series of games of tug-of-war. Picture a rope with a ribbon in the middle, over a mud pit, for each issue that people debate. On both sides of the pit, people are pulling like crazy, trying to get that ribbon pulled just that little bit further to their side of the mud. Every two or four or six years, someone takes a snapshot of where the ribbon is for that particular issue, and that's how the country is run until the next snapshot.
So my goal as a conservative blogger is to not only grab my piece of rope and pull like mad on the issues that matter to me - civil liberty, economic freedom, security, school choice and so on - but to try to convince more people to pull with me. We may never get the ribbon pulled all the way to our side of the pit and watch the DFLers on the other side sprawl into the mud, but we can, if we pull hard enough, get it far enough to our side that we can live with the results.
Which is where civility comes in. People are quick to call the other people pulling the rope their way as "stupid," "spreading a climate of hate," or any number of other pejoratives. To me, civic discourse means not assuming the other guys' motives are "evil." Wrong, perhaps - I'm taking to you, DFL - but not generally "evil."
That's a good place to start.
PIM: You've occasionally engaged in some unique extended narratives — lately, the 'Minnesota 2050' series — do you have a background in this kind of writing? How does it set your blog apart? Do you get anything from this type of writing that straight commentary on the news cannot provide?
MB: I'm not exactly sure where that started. My only writing background, besides a BA in English and as a freelance news reporter off and on in the eighties, was working as a technical writer for five years. Which, on the one hand, is nothing at all like blogging, but on the other hand gave me a little discipline, which is important when your goal is to do four posts a day and it's 6 a.m. and you've got a touch of writer's block.
Blogging is traditionally a medium of bite-sized pieces, and occasionally it's fun to write about something in a little greater depth - or at least length. There are some subjects that need more than fifty lines of snark; doing a series of shorter posts on a large topic lets me delve further into things, whether it's something satirical ("Minnesota 2050", "The Secession Diaries"), or more like news reporting ("Mike Hatch and American Bankers," and "The Great Saint Paul Land Grab") than I'd get to otherwise. As a practical matter, of course, it also allows me to do the grunt work of a bigger piece in smaller chunks that fit into my schedule!
Also, it's good marketing; if people drop by the blog to read Part I and like it, they'll come back to read Part II and Part III, and by that time hopefully they're hooked.
PIM: Any last thoughts?
MB: Blogging has been incredibly rewarding to me. While I'd still do the blog if I had the ten readers a day I had in the summer of 2002, I'm highly gratified that the audience I do have finds something they enjoy. It's opened up possibilities in my life that I'd boxed up and put away years and years ago.
Lobbyist Watch
From the Minnesota Campaign Finance & Public Disclosure Board:
Morning Reports
