Recent Posts

Joe Bodell

Lame leadership in the Senate

by Joe Bodell on May 17, 2013

strike while the iron is hot

strike while the iron is hot

Let’s be clear about one thing: we’re getting a TON of really great stuff out of this legislative session. Marriage equality, paying back the school funding shift, funding for all-day kindergarten (a bigger deal than virtually anyone is giving it credit for), and a budget that, while far from perfect, is worlds better than what we were getting from Tim Pawlenty’s reign of terror or from a Tea-infused GOP-led legislature. These things have come from both the House and Senate, and DFLers in both houses have worked hard on a variety of issues

 

All that being said, there’s one thing right now that’s an absolute joke, and it belies a complete lack of leadership in the State Senate: the state minimum wage.

 

The House has already passed a bill to raise the minimum wage above $9.00 per hour (and index it to inflation), and the Senate has a proposal to raise it to something in the $7.00 range. Majority Leader Tom Bakk said recently that he “doesn’t have the votes” to make even that increase happen. This is an absolute joke, and not a particularly funny one. This is a DFL Majority Leader who just helped guide the most contentious piece of social-issue legislation in a generation to success, but can’t whip 34 votes to raise the damned poverty wage to a measly nine bucks an hour?

 

The joke gets worse, though, because this is also a leadership team that’s pushing to raise legislator pay. Now, don’t get me wrong — legislator pay probably does need to go up. But again, this is an opportunity to permanently change the conversation about legislative pay — want to raise your pay? Raise the minimum wage concurrently. When workers win, legislators get a teeny bit more too. Good luck to future non-DFL-led legislatures ever changing that dynamic, if it were put in place. This Senate leadership is instead taking this opportunity to appear as crass and self-interested as any other set of politicians, when they could be using this chance to tie their own fortunes to the success of Minnesota workers.

 

To say nothing of the fact that the Senate, while legislatively not that different from the House, is somewhat more immune to political externalities since they’re not up for reelection for three more freaking years.

 

Just terrible politics, folks. Terrible leadership on this issue. And it’s such an important one for the DFL (and progressives as a distinct group) to be pushing if we want to hang on to these majorities in 2014.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 4 comments }

Walk a mile in the Other’s shoes

by Joe Bodell on May 13, 2013

All things being equal, marriage equality is about to pass the Minnesota State Senate.

 

From where I’m sitting, this is a good, even a great thing. Despite being in a committed, straight marriage with children, I take pride in standing up for the civil rights of all Americans to have the same rights and responsibilities.

 

But it has to be a really hopeless feeling to be on the losing side of this debate. Once passed, this isn’t going to change. Ever. The folks on the losing side in the Legislature and back home in their districts are just now seeing how the nation has left them behind so quickly, and that yes, they really are in the minority on the issue.

 

It has to feel so hopeless — can’t win at the ballot box, can’t win through the legislative process. You can hear the resignation and frustration in the voices of these Republican State Senators. Don’t get me wrong, they’re a bunch of hypocrites. But in their hearts, they believe that this is a line that shouldn’t be crossed, and the nation as a whole is already crossing it.

 

That must be a really hopeless feeling. It must feel a lot like wondering when the U.S. will stop torturing prisoners and detaining them without charged indefinitely, or when the populace will start caring.

 

The brutally honest answer is, probably never. The country has left the issue behind. It’s pretty much settled, and as progressives, we mortal souls who believe in habeas corpus and human dignity, should probably accept that the ground has shifted beneath our feet on the issue.

 

Now, an argument can be made that a few dozen prisoners in Guantanamo do not occupy the same scale as millions of LGBT Americans across the country, or the rights that will soon be theirs in the State of Minnesota. But to see our neighbors, in some cases our friends, look at America and see something of what they love about her evaporating…I don’t agree, but I can understand the feeling.

 

Tomorrow, when this is set in stone and due to become law, we progressives will do well to remember that though we may disagree, loudly and vehemently at times, and we may hate the very voices of those with whom we disagree, we are all still Americans. And we do better when we remember how to walk a mile in each others’ shoes.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 0 comments }

Equality is on the march

by Joe Bodell on May 10, 2013

marriageEqualityForAllBeen living under a rock? Then you may not know that marriage equality legislation passed the Minnesota House of Representatives yesterday, on a 75-59 vote. Four Republican Representatives joined the DFL majority to pass the bill, which ends the prohibition on same-sex civil marriage and protects clergy from retribution if they refuse to perform a ceremony with which they disagree.

 

Equality, my friends, is on the march.

 

Nine years ago, I was working on John Kerry’s presidential effort in the Boston campaign office, and by this time in 2004 we already knew we were going to take a beating on the gay marriage “issue”. Several states’ GOP legislatures had managed to get marriage discrimination amendments on their ballots, and used them to get conservative voters to the polls in huge numbers in November. It didn’t really matter that our candidate was personally opposed to marriage equality at the time, all that mattered was that he had some supporters who weren’t and Kerry was trying to thread the needle whereas George W. Bush was solidly opposed to equality for the big scary gays.

 

What a difference nine years makes.

 

…READ MORE

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 0 comments }

Race + Money = all our politics?

by Joe Bodell on April 26, 2013

Photo credit: NYTThis is the kind of thing I was starting to talk about in my previous post: we get caught up in a story that, really, is pretty much over other than the human-interest and prosecution phases, and miss a story that represents a larger tragedy both in lives lost and in its sad connection to our own lives.

 

A building housing several factories making clothing for European and American consumers collapsed into a deadly heap on Wednesday, only five months after a horrific fire at a similar facility prompted leading multinational brands to pledge to work to improve safety in the country’s booming but poorly regulated garment industry.

 

By early Thursday, the Bangladeshi news media reported that at least 142 people died in the rubble of Rana Plaza, a building in Savar, an industrial suburb of Dhaka, the capital. Police officials put the death toll at 134, with more than 1,000 of 2,500 workers injured, many of them still trapped. Soldiers, paramilitary police officers, firefighters and other citizens clawed through the wreckage, searching for survivors and bodies.

Like I said the other day, in no way am I feeling callous toward the Boston bombings or the victims. That’s my home, and I still love the dirty water. But the Bangladesh story spent just a few hours on the front page of the New York Times, soon to be replaced by more updates about Dzokhar Tsarnaev and hand-wringing over the minutiae of the investigation and when and whether he’d been read his Miranda rights.

 

That’s it. A few hours. For a story about a garment factory that supplies American consumers with cheap clothing, at the expense of the pay, benefits, and safety of the thousands of Bangladeshi workers in factories like the one that had visible cracks in the walls, and then collapsed on its workers. When we outsource textile jobs from the Carolinas to Bangladesh, it’s not just jobs we’re outsourcing. We’re outsourcing responsibility for safety, for taking care of the workers who, really, work for us to make things we want. We’re outsourcing labor standards and consciousness of what really goes into the goods we demand from the marketplace. Cheap jeans are important though, and when we prioritize cheap goods over actually caring when fires or collapses hurt and kill workers overseas, or nerve gas attacks happen in conflicts halfway around the world, that is when we reinforce the worst global stereotypes about Americans.

 

But it’s not really about Americans, is it? Those stereotypes exist here at home too, and they should make us uncomfortable so we can think about what it really means to advocate for equality and understanding and tolerance, and actually live the values we espouse.

 

I don’t know. More thinking on the way, after that latest story from Fox News about how welfare payments (your tax dollarz!) may have been used to buy the pressure cookers used in the bombings. Because, you know, welfare for brown people leads to terrorism something something.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 0 comments }

Thoughts elsewhere

by Joe Bodell on April 23, 2013

BostonI’ve made my home, my career, and my family here in Minnesota. But I’m originally from Boston, Massachusetts, born and bred. So I’ve been watching the news over the past week on a roller coaster of horror at the bombings, sadness for the victims, fear for friends and family back east, amazement at the tenaciousness of volunteers and professionals on the ground helping or tracking down the alleged bombers, relief that despite some close calls, all my friends and acquaintances are unscathed (despite some being a bit too close to the blasts for comfort), and a host of other emotions too.

 

It’s been quite a week.

 

I’ve also found my thoughts turning to the kid in custody, Dzokhar Tsarnaev. Let’s be honest with ourselves: this kid likely had little to no idea what his brother was getting him into. His life is effectively over, one way or another, and he is just nineteen years old. He lives while too many victims don’t. He has his legs while too many victims no longer do, but this is a young man who is about a biscuit away from still being a child, and he’s likely to pay a terrible price for his actions. One more tragedy on top of a tragic week.

 

…READ MORE

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 2 comments }

Is Bachmann (really) in trouble?

by Joe Bodell on April 18, 2013

Perhaps a foreboding title

Perhaps a foreboding title

The Big E noted the first round yesterday, and now there’s more trouble on the horizon for everyone’s favorite insane person: former Bachmann staffer (and little-person wrestling aficionado) Andy Parrish is signing an affidavit confirming that Bachmann’s presidential campaign did some very very bad things in Iowa.

 

Having maintained a public silence so far, Parrish referred questions Wednesday to his attorney, John Gil­more, who said his client will corroborate allegations from another former Bachmann aide, Peter Waldron.

Waldron, a Florida pastor, claims that the campaign hid payments to Iowa Sen. Kent Sorenson, in violation of Iowa Senate ethics rules that bar members from receiving pay from presidential campaigns.

 

Say what you will about the Republican Party’s politics, but as an organization they know how to close ranks and take care of their own. Conversely, they know when to cut loose a cancer that’s hanging around their necks (witness the expulsion of Sarah Palin from the party’s upper echelons after 2008). And that’s increasingly what this is looking like for Bachmann. Let’s be honest with ourselves: if the GOP really wanted to stop this ethics investigation, they could. If they really wanted Parrish and Sorenson to keep quiet, they could make the two offers they couldn’t refuse. That the investigation is going forward and these guys are signing sword statements means the party is either unable or unwilling to do what it takes to protect Bachmann from these charges.

 

And really, why should they? In a heavily Republican district, why should the NRCC have to drop half a million bucks every other year, four cycles in a row, to protect someone who theoretically should be an entrenched incumbent by now? That will be the real tell: with Jim Graves running again after missing by a hair’s breadth in 2012, will the NRCC keep Bachmann on its frontline defense list? Or will they too cut bait on a member who may finally have grown too toxic even for the modern Republican Party?

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 1 comment }

Read. Learn. Repeat.

by Joe Bodell on April 15, 2013

I’ll have more thoughts on today’s events in my ancestral homeland of Boston tomorrow. But for now, more about the Obama/Chained CPI ragefest, from Politicus:

 

Proposal. Not law. Copyright Reuters.

Proposal. Not law. Copyright Reuters.

Many GOP operatives fear Obama’s embrace of chained consumer price index, a mechanism to slow the growth of Social Security benefits over time, is a trap — a means of getting Republicans to support the policy on the record only to see Democrats savage them for it down the line.”

 

The Republican strategists who suspect this are partially correct. President Obama is using Chained CPI to set up a win/win/win situation for Democrats. Republicans have to choose between raising taxes in order to get the Chained CPI, arguing for Chained CPI without the tax increase, or rejecting Chained CPI. If Republicans express any desire to cut Social Security, Democrats will savage them for it during next year’s election. If Republicans agree to raise taxes at all, the base of their party will erupt in rage. If Republicans split and some of them reject Chained CPI, it will never become law. (Chained CPI probably won’t become law anyway, because Harry Reid and many Senate Democrats have promised to oppose any changes to Social Security.)

 

While the activists on the left continue to completely ignore the political realities unfolding before them, it is looking more and more like Obama’s Chained CPI offer was designed to call the Republican bluff on Social Security.

 

The truth is that outside of the right wing ideologues, many Republicans see real political danger in messing with Social Security. In plain English, Republicans will get nothing on Social Security unless they agree to raise taxes. Since they will never raise taxes, Chained CPI is pretty much DOA.

It’s not about winning the news cycle, it’s about winning the war. And the Obama White House is staffed with people who know how to win the long fights against opponents who fight dirty. So let’s take a deep breath, avoid stepping closer to that cliff in the back yard, and wait for the GOP to step in this trap.  It’s looking increasingly like they don’t have a choice.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 1 comment }

I’ve been watching with a mixture of disdain and wonder the release and public flagellation of President Obama’s 2013 budget proposal. Disdain mostly because a Democratic President actually just proposed cutting benefits to current Social Security recipients (along with the rest of us, when we get there) through this Chained CPI bullpucky, and wonder because of what a brutally aggressive political gambit it represents.

Proposal. Not law. Copyright Reuters.

Proposal. Not law. Copyright Reuters.

 

I’ll explain. For one thing, Obama’s budget has zero chance of becoming law. We know this. He knows this. Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi know this. None whatsoever. Perhaps this is an optimistic reading of the circumstances here, but I think that’s part of the point of this exercise. The things that President Obama proposed in this budget are the very things the Republican Party demanded in return for additional tax revenue to close the budget deficit (despite Social Security contributing exactly zero dollars to the deficit. I digress). At the same time, Obama knows that McConnell and Boehner will never, ever, ever agree to any compromise at all, let alone one that involves additional tax revenue on top of what Obama already achieved in December. So by offering them exactly what they wanted with the foreknowledge that they will never accept it in any real way, he’s forcing them once again (and again, and again) to own their right-wing, reactionary agenda in front of a public that, if memory serves, recently rejected that crap by a pretty huge margin.

 

Is this proposal a good thing? No, of course not. It doesn’t do enough to push renewable energy production or rapid transit options or a host of other priorities, especially in light of a still-fragile economy. But with divided government, we really have two options: publicly moan about how mean and nasty the other side is, or beat the other side over the head with their own intransigence until they either submit, or the voting public turns them out on their ear and demands progress. John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are stuck with the first option, whether they like it or not. President Obama has apparently chosen the second option. The progressive movement must keep up the fight to protect Social Security and Medicare, and make sure public opinion stays on our side. At the same time, we need to help keep the focus where it needs to be through the 2014 elections: on a right-wing political party that has effectively broken our national political discourse, and does not deserve to be anywhere near the levers of power.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 1 comment }

Mike Obermueller

Mike Obermueller

Mike Obermueller has had a tumultuous decade in Minnesota politics: running for a State House seat in then-blood-red Eagan in 2006, he lost by a slim margin; two years later he won the seat in the Obama wave, only to lose it again in the Republican counter-wave of 2010. Last year he ran hard at entrenched Republican Congressman John Kline in the reconfigured 2nd district, winning 46% of the vote (a better margin than any recent DFL opponent).

 

He announced recently that he will run again, this time with experience and nearly two years to organized, fundraise, and get out across the district to talk to as many voters as humanly possible. I emailed back and forth with Obermueller to ask him a few questions, which you’ll find below the fold along with a few of my thoughts:

…READ MORE

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 11 comments }

Even a broken clock is right twice a day:

 

Rush Limbaugh said those who oppose same-sex marriage must accept that they’ve “lost the issue.”

 

Said Limbaugh: “This issue is lost. I don’t care what the Supreme Court does, this is now inevitable — and it’s inevitable because we lost the language on this.”

 

He added that conservatives “lost the issue when we started allowing the word ‘marriage’ to be bastardized and redefined by simply adding words to it.”

 

He may be a conceited, racist, classist bastard, but he’s not wrong on this. Taking over the language is one important step on the road to taking over the issue, and now that progressives have the force of public opinion on our side in the equality debate, the terms “gay marriage” or “same-sex marriage” sound a lot more like “marriage” than they do like “gay”.

 

If it were fifty years ago, of course, the debate would be over “interracial” marriage. Which, of course, is now just “marriage”. Same thing on this issue. Meanwhile, here in Minnesota…the dead-end keeps dead-ending:

 

“Third, there is a definitive problem. Homosexuals claim: “We were born this way; it is in our genes; God made us gay.” They cite old “gay gene” studies predominantly conducted by researchers who are homosexuals; studies that have been repudiated by credible research.

 

Yet these same biased and discredited studies have been widely publicized by the liberal media as true and factual. They essentially practice Joseph Goebel’s (sic) Nazi philosophy of propaganda, which is basically this: Tell a lie long enough and loud enough and eventually most mindless Americans will believe it.”

 

Keep it up, folks. You’re making our case for us, and helping us win a few elections here and there too. Heckuva job!

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

{ 0 comments }