August 17th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
Matt Peiken, a Twin Cities journalist and self-described progressive, offered a refreshingly honest and fair critique of Mark Dayton’s career. We are a bit surprised that the Strib published this commentary. Kudos to the Strib. It will undoubtedly be punished.
The spectacle of a trust fund baby beating Kelliher was just too much. It was quite interesting to watch two guys out-spend the endorsed (woman) DFL candidate. Entenza was spending his wife’s money to get elected, so he could spend your money once elected. (Advice to Lois: put your husband on a tight budget.)
Dayton, using his inheritance, ran on the message of taxing the rich–though in reality his regressive policies will tax all Minnesotans (more on that later). He is the classic guilty trust fund baby. He has never created wealth or jobs and fails to grasp the moral superiority of the free enterprise system that created his wealth. We suggest he revisit how his predecessors built the company that has employed so many and the company that has given so much to Minnesota. (We note here that Dayton’s ex-wife, Alida Rockefeller Messinger, contributed to his campaign.)
Enough sermonizing, here is the commentary by Matt Peiken: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/100806309.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUsZ
Mr. Peiken has a website called “3 minute egg” featuring videos of the Fringe festival and other Twin Cities attractions. While we do not share his progressive views, we share his irritation and appreciate his sharp writing and entrepreneurial spirit. We wish him great success. Here is his website. http://3minuteegg.org/
Posted in 2010 Elections, Blog Posts, Kim Crockett | No Comments »
August 9th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
We the People
Everyone knows that the founders gave us three “co-equal branches” of government and carefully crafted ”checks and balances.” It has not worked perfectly but the founders anticipated that problem. Article V of the U.S. Constitution permits Congress to amend the Constitution–this is widely known. What is not widely known is that state legislatures can also petition Congress for a convention; two thirds (34) of the states are required. Any amendment passed at the convention has to be ratified by three fourths (38) of the states. An Article V convention has never been called. Is it time?
The Constitution has been amended 27 times. The first 10 amendments are the Bill of Rights; they were ratified in 1791 a few years after the Constitution was ratified. Interestingly, the twenty-seventh amendment was part of the proposed Bill of Rights in 1789 but it was not ratified until 1992 by the vote of Michigan. It contains a common concept of “good government” today; that pay raises for Congress cannot take effect until after an intervening election.
There is a growing movement to call an Article V Convention. There is always fear of a “run away” convention, though the requirements of Article V to both call a convention (two thirds rule) and to ratify an amendment (three quarters rule) would seem to make that unlikely.
Clearly, we have a “run away” federal government. The founders gave the states a tool to address weaknesses in the Constitution and abuses by the federal government. We will be exploring this option from time to time here at the Minnesota Free Market Institute.
Former Senator Norm Coleman has decided that it is time for an Article V convention. Here are his most recent remarks on the subject. http://americanactionnetwork.org/news/aans-ceo-norm-colemans-remarks-alec-conference
Posted in Article V Convention, Blog Posts, Kim Crockett, Limited Government, ObamaCare | 1 Comment »
August 4th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
The media coverage of a planned underground copper-nickel mine on the Iron Range has been very positive and so far has the support of key state and federal legislators. The project has not cleared all the hurdles-especially the EPA. Feasibility studies will continue for several years, though financing seems assured once the hurdles are cleared. The mining company is a joint venture called “Twin Metals Minnesota” between Chilean owned Antofagasta (best said after a good glass of red Chilean wine) and a Canadian firm called Duluth Metals (beer will do here). The feasibility studies alone will provide good jobs to an estimated 300 people, too many of whom are probably environmental lawyers but job are jobs. Owners predict 5,ooo construction jobs over an initial 3-year period and 3,000 permanent jobs with a total investment of $2 billion. This is sweet, welcome news for our neighbors on the Range. The site is loaded with metals needed for electronics, batteries and even wind turbines and solar panels–that should put a sock in anyone’s mouth who wants to oppose this because it is near the BWCA. We wish the project God’s speed and hope it only hits reasonable regulatory bumps (is this possible at Lisa Jackson’s EPA?) that actually protect the environment. If Senators Klobuchar and Frankin want to earn their pay, they’ll run interference for this mine and get it going ASAP.
The development was covered on Mine Web:http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page66?oid=109166&sn=Detail And here is the Neal St.Anthony’s article in the Strib :http://www.startribune.com/business/99903829.html
Posted in Blog Posts, Environment, Jobs, Kim Crockett | No Comments »
July 28th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
Update as of July 28:The Democratic leadership wanted this passed before fall elections but fell short with just 57 of the 60 votes needed to move forward with a vote. The usual Republican suspects Democrats turn to for votes (Senators Collins, Snowe and Graham) opposed the Act. Senator Scott Brown of Massachusettes, who recently provided the 60th vote for so-called financial reform, also opposed the Act. This time, he stuck with Republicans. There is a good article in the Washington Post by Dan Eggen if you want to read more about it: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/27/AR2010072704656.html?nav=emailpage
Background from early July: As we approach the 4th of July, Democratic leaders in Congress, in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, lead the charge to pass the “Disclose” Act on June 24, 2010. The Act, introduced by Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Representative Chris Van Hollen (D-Md), is designed to blunt the First Amendment ruling in favor of speech rights for corporations and other groups, including labor unions. The Citizens United decision, relying on the First Amendment, ruled that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited. The court reasoned that political speech is indispensable to a democracy, though it upheld the ban on direct contributions to candidates from corporations and unions. We note here that political speech is also fundamental to free enterprise and individual liberty.
Our friends at CATO are on top of this: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2010/02/12/congress-goes-after-citizens-united/
Background: Citizens United made a movie about Hillary Clinton (Hillary: The Movie). They were prevented from showing the movie under the “Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act” that regulates political speech. They fought for an injunction against the law, took their case to the Supreme Court and won. Let’s see if Congress succeeds in once again tinkering with the First Amendment.
If passed by the Senate, the Act will require the disclosure of the names of major donors for political ads, require corporate and union executives to appear in political ads that their entities pay for and like a candidate, state that he or she “approves this message.” All of these are designed to discourage political speech. It also bans government contractors from contributing to campaigns, and regulates the recipients of TARP money as well as contributions from foreign nationals and countries. Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid (D-Nev) wants it passed before the fall elections.
Aside from the obvious constitutional issues, which have been raised by (mostly Republican) critics, liberal Democrats have also criticized the bill because the Act contains hard to defend “carve outs” that, when applied, exempt certain powerful special interest groups such as the Humane Society, AARP and the Sierra Club–but also the NRA. The exemptions were negotiated by Democrats so they could get the Act passed and on the president’s desk. This is sausage making to be sure. Sadly, it will add to the already absurd quilt-work of bad election/campaign finance laws that thwart the First Amendment right to political speech.
Posted in Blog Posts, First Amendment, Free Speech, Kim Crockett, Limited Government | No Comments »
May 17th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
After reaching an agreement with Governor Pawlenty late on Sunday, the legislature went into a brief special session to formalize the terms. The good news is that Pawlenty’s insistence on no new taxes won the day; the legislature had to find the funds within the existing revenues. Moreover, most of the “unallotments” made by Governor Pawlenty in 2009 that were disallowed by the Minnesota Supreme Court have been enacted (but not made permanent). Like many businesses and families, our elected officials had to figure out how to live with less. The state is still left with a projected deficit of about $5.8 billion for FY 2012-13. That number will be higher if the nearly $2 billion shifted from K-12 education in 2011 is not repaid.
Posted in Blog Posts, Deficit, Kim Crockett, Limited Government, Tax Policy | No Comments »
May 11th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
- Tax Cut Rally
Thanks to all the good folks who worked hard to make the Rally a success again this year. Special thanks to Dan McGrath at Minnesota Majority and Phil Krinkie at the Taxpayers League. We were so busy talking to people and handing out constitutions and information that we never made it to the podium to hear Jason Lewis and all the great speakers. It was cold and windy ( to counter-act all the HOT AIR coming from inside the legislature). Thanks to those who stopped by to share some great thoughts on solving the state deficit without raising taxes.
Posted in Blog Posts | No Comments »
May 11th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
The Minnesota Free Market Institute is a proud member of the the Minnesota Budget Solutions Coalition. The Coalition is an informal alliance of non-profit organizations formed to solicit ideas from the public and members of the coalition on the state budget.
The Minnesota Budget Solutions Coalition released a brief in 2009 demonstrating that the budget can be balanced without raising taxes (for a copy go to http://www.mnbudgetsolutions.com/) . Now more than ever, innovative ideas are needed in St. Paul to balance the budget and get us on the road to recovery and prosperity. Raising taxes during an economic recession will have dire consequences. As our legislators debate in St. Paul, employers all over the state are deciding whether to hire (or fire) a new employee, invest in new equipment, or leave the state for a friendlier business climate. Minnesota already has one of the highest per-capita tax burdens in the nation. Taxing the so-called “rich” will not solve our budget problems. Every time we raise taxes on individuals and business, we are showing people the door. Our policy brief contains creative ideas that both parties can embrace if they are serious about living within our means. It also contains some strong medicine that will be hard for any politician to swallow. Please share these ideas and encourage our leaders to return Minnesota to economic health.
Note: The Coalition is busy updating the policy brief with figures from the current budget. Watch for its release this summer.
Posted in Blog Posts, Deficit, Kim Crockett, Limited Government, Policy Memos, Tax Policy | No Comments »
May 11th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
The St.Paul Pioneer Press at TwinCities.com published an article (see http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_14698526 ) by Peter Nelson, an attorney and policy fellow at the Center of the American Experiment and Kim Crockett, the President and General Counsel of the Minnesota Free Market Institute. Nelson and Crockett argued that Governor Pawlenty’s use of the “Unallotment” statute was proper and that any concerns about the statute giving the executive too much power should be handled at the legislature. Unfortunately, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled 4-3 against the governor, throwing the current budget and legislative session into chaos. The Chief Justice, writing for the majority, amended the statute more to its liking, rather than applying the statute as written by the legislature. We applaud the dissent written by Justice Lorie Gildea and recommend reading at least the first paragraph. Judges are to say what the law is, not what the law should be. Unfortunately, a majority of the court took up a legislative mantel, forgetting the limited role of the judiciary in these matters. Now the state is in uncharted territory with just a few days left of the legislative session.
The opinion can be found at http://www.mncourts.gov/opinions/sc/current/OPA100064-0505.pdf
Posted in Blog Posts, Kim Crockett, Limited Government | No Comments »
April 14th, 2010 by Kim Crockett
Do you feel free? According to the Tax Foundation, April 13 was “Tax Freedom” day in Minnesota; we spent, on average, 103 days working to pay federal, state and local taxes. Minnesota ranks 8th in the nation for its tax burden. You can find out how Minnesota compares to other states in “2010 Facts & Figures.” This booklet contains individual and corporate income tax rates, business tax climates, excise taxes tax burdens and state spending. Please see the link below to view/download a copy: http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/2181.html
The Minnesota Tea Party will host a rally on April 15th from 5pm-9pm. For details on this and a tea party near you, go to: http://mnteapartypatriots.ning.com/events
And the annual Tax Cut Rally hosted by Jason Lewis will be on May 8 from 11am-3pm. You can get the details here: http://www.taxcutrally.com/
Posted in Blog Posts | No Comments »
Climategate “Reviewed” (Again)
July 19th, 2010 by Kim CrockettLast fall, the “Climategate” scandal erupted when emails and documents from the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit (CRU) were released (without permission) to the public. The CRU emails, including some with Michael Mann at Penn State, revealed a pattern of conduct that no one– but especially no scientist– would be proud of; requests to delete inconvenient emails, the exclusion of scientitists who are viewed as “skeptics” from the peer review process and hiding the ball from formal information requests. The terrible fall out–and the lesson to be learned for all of us— is that “science” has been revealed to be quite vulnerable to political pressures especially when combined with generous grants. The old saying “Follow the Money” certainly applies here. That sad point was made last summer at our Climate Change Symposium by Dr. Fred Singer. (And we continue to follow this important issue because the global warming activists, lead by Al Gore et. al., have captured our government at the local, state and federal level. The impact on free enterprise and individual freedom is profound.)
Climategate has now been “reviewed” several times by organizations we should be able to trust; a special committee of the British Parliament, Penn State, an environmental agency of the Netherlands and most recently the University of East Anglia itself.
The Minnesot Free Market Institute (and other members of the No Cap and Trade coalition) approach these “reviews” with great skepticism. The reviews seem less than indepedent in their methodology and conclusions; the self-dealing is just compounded . Moreover, we are impressed with the speed with which they were all done. It seems that the institutions who are committed to the UN’s view of global warming (which relies on CRU data) were in quite a hurry to do damage control following Climategate.
The Wall Street Journal, which shares our skepticism, covered the latest review here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703394204575367483847033948.html
You can read more at the Volokh Conspiracy (by Jonathan Adler), including international commentary about the quality of these reviews here: http://volokh.com/2010/07/11/climategate-revisited/ .
We think there is a better way to insure a clean environment and recommend to you the “free market environmentalism” approach taken by the Property and Environmental Research Center (PERC) in Bozeman, Montana. Please visit them at http://www.perc.org/ .
Posted in Blog Posts, Climate Change, Commentaries, Environment, Kim Crockett | No Comments »