It's March 31 and the heaviest snow of the year is still coming down - at least 4" and up to 8" by tomorrow morning. I do not recall as heavy a snowfall as this, ever. It is so dense, it's almost unpackable. No snowmen this time.

A few photos for our guys in Iraq who visit this site periodically - enjoy it guys. Once this melts, this ought to be it - then again, we thought so last week.

Labels: snow

I'm late with this but it is still worth viewing. Last Wednesday, March 26, the Coleman Campaign officially launched his bid for a second term as a US Senator. The kick-off was held at the campaign headquarters in St. Paul and the event was packed - well over 750 people of all stripes were in attendance! I was in the main room but there were two other rooms where video screens displayed Senator Coleman's talk.






A few photos of the event are included. Note the gratitude on the part of the Somalis. We sometimes wonder if anyone ever appreciates what we do - some of these people get it. Included with the Somali women is Barb White, Republican Candidate for MN's 5th Congressional District, seat currently held by Representative Keith Ellison.

Labels: Coleman

Supervising the very complex derivative products of the banks and of the rest of the financial system would be an enormous technical challenge. The institutions themselves -- paying very high salaries and having their own survival at risk -- got it wrong. Would the Fed get it right?

Martin Feldstein, from the Wall Street Journal this morning. A useful rule: Regulators regulate when they have access to better information than the regulated. But also useful: Regulation to minimize systemic risk. Can the Fed do better?

In spite of 40 years of negative press and educating our children to believe we are the lousiest nation on the planet with a myriad of sins so horrible as to warrant extinction, some manage to escape this educational-institution imposed mind set and then do something extraordinary, really extraordinary.

We Americans, all shades, types and personalities, still possess a uniqueness rare on the planet - we encourage people to think. And, we still have some people who REALLY think well.

DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (thank goodness for acronyms), has just contracted with Deka to develop the latest in prosthetic devices. Please, please, please go to this website and watch the film on their latest human arm. It is unbelievable!

When we: tell our kids that we are a rotten nation; refuse to push our children in academic endeavors; ignore the good America has done; teach only one side of history, government, etc.; use Garrison Keillor's Lake Wobegon description that all children are above average; make excuses for not learning; let them believe they are unaccountable for anything; lie to them by keeping truths from them - all this leads to a nation that eventually may not function.

Yet, in spite of the victim-driven, anti-American mantra, we produce thinkers, dreamers, idealists that no other nation produces. The kind of invention you will see in this film occurs NO WHERE ELSE ON EARTH.

Wake up, you negative forces. Just imagine what we could do if we encouraged the positive traits of our people.

Labels: education, ingenuity, veterans

The news article is here. The Times has launched a new website for ROI Central Minnesota (and I'm telling you, that ROI stands for my name en Francaise) that has the report (in .pdf). It's a nice new site (I got to watch the roll-out last Tuesday) and will be a place I post some comments on. The trends and indicators page will be a great asset to my work.

Elwyn Tinklenberg, running for the Congressional seat in the Sixth District, attacks incumbent Michele Bachmann for her vow to forgo earmarks this legislative session.

When 6th District Rep. Michele Bachmann recently pledged not to use the earmarking process to obtain federal funding, she could not have foreseen the emergency closing of a bridge in the heart of the largest city in her congressional district.

Therein lies the problem with taking extreme political positions that leave no room for the unexpected.

The Office of Management and Budget generally defines earmarks as "add-ons" to a general appropriation that direct additional spending to a very specific project. The problem being that too often the earmarks are "dropped" into committee reports and never seen by most of the Congress.

In 2005 earmark appropriations were estimated to total $18 billion. It was then that President Bush urged the Congress "to reform the budget process and expose every earmark to the light of day ... ."

The now-infamous $223 million "bridge to nowhere," in Alaska (almost as long as the Golden Gate and higher than the Brooklyn Bridge but only connects the 50 or so residents of Gravina Island to a city of 8,000), was an earmark obtained by Alaska Republican Congressman Don Young and often used as an example of earmarking excess.

Yet instead of citing the abuses of Young, Bachmann often is critical of Minnesota colleagues such as Jim Oberstar and Colin Peterson, who understand that earmarking is a legitimate response to important needs such as the I-35W bridge.

Well, El, our criticism of the Oberstar earmarks is not about the bridge but about the trails. Oberstar was quite proud of his 2005 bill that kicked a goodly bit of money into trails (I cannot even count them all.) But we continue:

The concern is that not all earmarks are "bridges to nowhere."

In fact, the emergency situation created by the closing of a bridge across the Mississippi in St. Could is a classic example of a time when earmarked funds can be an appropriate process. With what we know now, it's not clear that the DeSoto Bridge can be repaired, and there is some speculation it may stay closed until it can be replaced.

Originally scheduled to be replaced in 2016, that schedule could be accelerated if federal dollars could be secured to help pay for a new bridge; however, that appropriation would be an earmark — hence, the problem with Bachmann's pledge to not take earmarks for her district.

If the De Soto bridge is a project worthy of federal funds, then let Senators Klobuchar and Coleman and Rep. Bachmann enter a bill for the money. It may be attached to another bill for passage, but it would be owned by those people asking the government to spend the money.

My good friend Gary Gross comments in the chat on this article that the I-35W bridge is not an earmark. It was an appropriation and centerpiece of the legislation. The earmark reform people want is for spending to be accountable, not to forswear ever having an appropriation go to a specific project. To use the definition Tinklenberg chooses here would make the Tennessee Valley Authority an earmark.

But even more interesting is that Tinklenberg, rather than tack towards Bachmann on the earmark question, is willing to take a pro-earmark position. John Fund reports (quoted by the Club for Growth here) that Congress cannot get itself off the earmark habit even when it sees polls that strongly oppose it. It appears that the ability of people to even track them is being made more difficult now. Elect Tinklenberg, and he'll have an easier time sneaking a few in for us.

Hardly a profile in courage there. If he's going to be pro-earmark, you'd think he'd not want to hide his grabbing hand.

Labels: earmarks, Minnesota, Tinklenberg

St. Cloud Times managing editor John Bodette defends his paper's use of the term "anti-abortion" in its coverage of a local appearance by Alan Keyes:

The Times follows The Associated Press Stylebook in matter of style and usage.

The entry in the AP stylebook on "abortion" reads: "Use anti-abortion instead of pro-life and abortion rights instead of pro-abortion or pro-choice. Avoid abortionist, which connotes a person who performs clandestine abortions."

So, when writing our news stories we use the terms anti-abortion instead of pro-life unless it appears in a quote or the title of a group or organization.

...The reason the AP Stylebook makes its decision probably involves clarity of terms.

Here is a key quote from the foreword to the 2006 edition of the AP Stylebook: "But just as the AP remains dedicated to its fundamental journalistic principles, the AP Stylebook remains committed to its original concept: to provide a uniform presentation of the printed word, to make a story written anywhere understandable everywhere."

The original article is not online that I can find (the Times still uses a one-week pay wall for its free archives), so I cannot give you the context, but I think that pretty well says it. I'm not arguing with the AP stylebook's representation of abortion positions, but interested that Bodette would consider anti-abortion part of its "clarity of terms".

This morning the Times runs on page 1 an unsigned AP article that contains the same paragraph as this one signed by Tom Raum of the AP in the Washington Post:

The two Democrats are calling for a more activist role for the U.S. government to protect individuals. McCain is echoing standard GOP dogma of protecting markets and opposing bailouts.

What "clarity of terms" is incorporated in the use of the word "dogma"? Is Mr. Raum engaged in making "a story written anywhere understandable everywhere," or is he making a political point that makes the free market position somehow less considered, a knee-jerk reaction rather than something thought out as being better for individuals. "Activist" is a word that has connotations for economists different than for the public -- to the latter, it's meant to say Democrats want to do something, while the Republicans want to do nothing, and want to do nothing because they aren't thinking, they're just acting on an -ism.

That's clear enough to me ... clearly, the AP is impugning McCain's policies. Is "impugn" in the AP Stylebook?

Labels: economics, Media

We learn from an interested reader that Dr. Ward Churchill will speak at the 15th annual Indigenous Nations and Dakota Studies Spring conference on April 3. His topic: Genocide and the Dakota People.

I am not sure what he has been doing since he was fired for academic misconduct (on an 8-1 vote by the University of Colorado's Board of Regents). He sued for wrongful termination, which is almost de rigueur in these cases. At PowerLine, John asks how much Churchill is being paid and whether Minnesotans' tax dollars are picking up the fee. We will have an organizer of the conference on The Final Word with us tomorrow (show 3-5, the professor will be with us around 3:30), but the press release for the conference says

The conference is funded by Sakpe Bdewakantunwan Dakota Community, Yellow Medicine Dakota Community and the Tinta Wita (Prairie Island) Dakota Community.

We will find out if that is indeed so.

If you have been following the cowardly behavior of the Forest Lake School District personnel, you are aware that the principal, Mr. Massey, reneged on his word to alum Pete Hegseth, Executive Director of Vets for Freedom to allow Pete and his heroic buddies the opportunity to give students a chance to hear true events about Iraq.

Nick Coleman of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, ever the friend of the anti-military left, got his digs in yesterday. The school superintendent and principal cannot seem to decide why they went back on their word - was it parents? outsiders? the children? security? the press? Who knows - their story keeps changing.

In response to the unfair, unjust, and inconsistent comments made by Forest Lake administrators, Pete Hegseth has released the following statement:

"There was NO press conference called and there was NO safety threat.

"I called the superintendent 3 times, left 2 messages, he will not call me back.

"We did NOTHING wrong and we haven't piled on (can't say that about others in the media - Janet)...we haven't sent out anyone's contact information or asked anyone to email anyone (I chose to email to my list - Janet)"

Thanks, Pete

Pete, we thank you and the soldiers who were denied the opportunity to tell their real experiences, not media-biased experiences. Who lost? The students and anyone else who would be open to learning what really is happening in Iraq. All missed true stories of valor, leadership, calm in incredibly stressful circumstances. So many who could have learned much were denied by the politically correct (in reality, wrong) actions of so few.

Special thanks to you and our soldiers, agents of security, stability and therefore, peace.

Labels: Iraq, US Soldiers

In past posts here, here I've written about feminist views on a number of items. Related to these posts is my belief that a degree in women's studies is the biggest waste of time and money a family and student can expend in an excuse for a college education.

Finally, one university has awakened to the uselessness of this field. Turns out London's Metropolitan University is dropping its undergrad program this summer - why, no interest. Maybe no interest because a degree in this topic area does not train one to think or prepare one for a career, a job or anything else productive.

A few years ago, one of the Twin Cities major papers (I forget which one) ran a front page article questioning the value of a college education. Seems a young lady had just graduated from one of our local private institutions (say $120,000 investment) with a degree in women's studies but couldn't find a job.

DUH - what does one learn in a women's studies curriculum? Do they learn about: Chinese foot binding; east African gender mutilation; the Hindu practice of making widows throw themselves on the burning funeral pyres of their husbands (until the Brits forced the end of this absurd practice); polygamy in the Middle East; "temporary" mandated marriages; etc. No, the female instructors of Women's Studies curricula focus on white men, period.

These feminists would like you to believe that they and only they are the reason women were able to get into a wider variety of industries. I hate to burst the bubble but it was the free market economy that opened up jobs to women. In the mid 1970's, the number of blue collar jobs fell below the number of white collar jobs. Guess which of these two categories can use the strengths of women better? Yep, white collar jobs.

Women's Studies has become a self-perpetuating whining industry within academia - get a master's or Phd. in women's studies, teach it and brainwash some more unsuspecting young women. Do they learn to think? No, they learn to assess blame for anything to men. At least one university has realized it's a total waste of time, money, energy, and education. I hope more will follow - a quick domino effect here would be beneficial to the planet.

Labels: higher education

I mean the single-payer health advocates, who probably are cursing into their green tea after reading that Minnesota is the healthiest state in the union.

That's according to CQ Press, which is out with its list of the most healthy and livable states for 2008.

Minnesota supplanted Vermont as the nation's most healthy state, marking the first time since 1999 that Minnesota has come out on top in the annual survey. In its "Health Care State Rankings 2008: Health Care Across America" survey released Wednesday, the publisher examined 21 factors such as access to health care providers, affordability of health care and the general health of the population to come up with this year's list.

New Hampshire came in second followed by Vermont, which won the award as the nation's most healthy state six out of the last seven years. Maine and Massachusetts round out the top five.

Also in the rankings was an emphasis on preventative care. "Congratulations to the very healthy citizens and leaders of Minnesota!" the introduction concludes.

What say you now, Sen. Berglin?

Labels: health care, legislature, Minnesota

The Student Senate at St. John's University has issued a condemnation of the Minnesota Legislature for its override of Governor Pawlenty's veto of the gas tax.

WHEREAS: The Minnesota Legislature raised the Minnesota tax on gasoline and diesel fuels; and,
WHEREAS: This increase has an enormous financial impact on people with fixed and low income; and,
WHEREAS: Students are a major demographic of people living on limited budgets; and,
WHEREAS: This tax will only affect students negatively when they are traveling within the state for internships and trips home; and,
WHEREAS: This will place an additional, undue burden on families who are scrapping to make tuition payments; and,
WHEREAS: This is a wholly avoidable tax levied against the students of the state; and,
WHEREAS: If the Minnesota Legislature is going to make claims that it will stand in support of its student constituents, it must understand that this tax is contradictory to any such notion; and,
WHEREAS: Saint John’s University and the College of Saint Benedict rely on diesel fuel for inter-campus transportation; and,
WHEREAS: This transportation fee is paid for by student dollars
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT WE, THE SAINT JOHN’S UNIVERSITY STUDENT SENATE, do hereby condemn the Minnesota Legislature for raising the gas tax to levels so high that student mobility is threatened.

Will other student governments follow suit?

Labels: gas, legislature, Minnesota, taxes

Given the lengthy comments made in the chat accompanying this article, there appears to be a great deal of interest in banks trying to cater to Muslim businesses seeking credit. The comments seem to think this some great injustice, that Muslim borrowers are getting a favor from these banks.

It means no such thing.

Islamic banking in the United States is still relatively new, and there are regulatory concerns regarding it. In short, Islamic or shari'a law forbids the use of interest (riba, in Arabic) in any debt contract, be it as a payment on deposits or as a payment for a loan. Western banks see this set of customers as a potential source of revenue, and seek ways to accommodate the religious beliefs of the borrowers. It's similar in type to producing food that is Kosher to capture a Jewish clientèle.

Islamic loans involve a different risk-sharing arrangement, so that banks in essence have an ownership stake in the business for a fixed period. On loans, that doesn't appear to be too hard. Deposits are a little harder. I can find several examples of lariba or no-interest financing of business firms. (I'll note that the Islamic bank I've just linked to, American Finance House LARIBA, has Islamic mortgages that qualify for repurchase by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.)

Now this is pretty much all I know about these types of loans as made in the USA, from my notes for teaching Money and Banking. I am not an expert in this field.

I fail to see, however, why anyone should be upset by the presence of a finance instrument that conforms to Islamic law. An ingredient to a hand up (vs. a hand out) is to give people access to credit. These loan programs are a good way to get someone into the role of entrepreneur, invested in and connected to the local community.

One person I spoke with asked if a Christian or a Jew would be able to take out this kind of contract? I would hope that answer is yes; I wish I could speak with a local banker who's offering them to see if this is true. Meanwhile, to qualify for these loans here in St. Cloud, potential borrowers are going through a financial education program.

It doesn't appear anyone has started the programs locally. I certainly hope some of the ignorance in the discussion from the Times does not leave a useful idea stillborn.

Labels: banking, economics, Minnesota, St. Cloud

6-8am on 1450 KNSI (streaming audio available for those outside the St. Cloud area.) I'd like to talk about the story Janet has been covering the last few days about VFF and Forest Lake High. I'll have something to say as well about the DFL budget solution -- I'm going to suggest there's a deal here the GOP should consider.

Labels: KNSI

At least two decades ago I tried to co-author a paper with someone (who deserves to retain his innocence for what I'm about to write) over what initiates inflation versus what sustains inflation. The old Friedman statement that "inflation is everywhere and always a monetary phenomenon" seemed to us to be more a statement about what sustains an inflation. If you never print money, you shouldn't get inflation that lasts long at all. Indeed, you'd think you would get no inflation at all (some define inflation purely as an increase in the money supply without reference to price indices of any type.)

So the question was, what causes an increase in the supply of money? Not too long ago reaction functions were all the rage, replaced by Taylor and McCallum rules, but basically making the money supply or a policy interest rate a function of observed economic phenomena. What's in those functions? "Policy choices", you say, and I say "sure, but why did you make those choices?" We argued that the institutions of a country mattered for that; so too do the preferences of the polity. Germany has a greater aversion to inflation than Italy; it chose institutions that expressed that preference. Thus the things that initiated monetary accommodation -- that led to the monetary expansion that sustained the inflation -- could be different things in different places. My co-author and I share an aversion to one-size-fits-all explanations of inflation.

But I never found this a terribly satisfying explanation. Why do Germans hate inflation more than Italians? Sure, the Germans had hyperinflation, but the Hungarians had worse -- are they somehow more foolish than Germans? Made no sense to me. And so when the paper drew rejection letters from several fine journals, we got the message: Bad idea, go back and try again. We went back, came up with different stuff, moved on.

I write all this as prologue to reading John Palmer's explanation of the current macroeconomic situation.

Every time I look at the data, it seems pretty clear to me that if aggregate demand is pushed upward, then in the short run the economy will experience reduced unemployment rates and (often with a lag) higher rates of inflation. During such a period, the unemployment rate drops below the natural unemployment rate (or the NAIRU), and that seems pretty much like what the North American economies were experiencing during the past few years.

And I keep reading that, and I ask: what initiated that increase in aggregate demand? He's suggesting that the inflation is, in the old language of my grad school days, demand-pull. But what was the first thing that pulled demand? War spending? Investment? Housing boom? Or perhaps the first shock came by a slowdown in productivity, which led to a cost-push inflation. Which is it?

Commenting on that post, Mike Moffatt says that "treating the current situation as a demand-side problem is terribly misguided." But even a supply shock is often accommodated by easy money because that's what the system prefers; the economy's closeness to a national election affects that choice. So too does the possible rapid loss of liquidity in the system, which is what I think Arnold Kling means when he says "The central bank matters more as a lender of last resort than as a monetary authority." If the central bank faces a suddenly illiquid financial system, it may accommodate inflation in order to provide liquidity. Some might see that as seat of the pants monetary policy, but it feels vaguely familiar.

John's story, as I read it, seems to assume a constant level of full-employment GDP. I mentioned the productivity slowdown before -- but even there, it's growing more than it did in the 1970s. knzn suggests it's actually better than you think.

Labels: economics, inflation

As sure as it is warming up outside (or getting to the busy season of an academic schedule, which is the period between the end of 'spring' break and commencement), it's time for baseball again. I keep reading how it's harmful for Boston and Oakland to be required to play meaningful games in Japan and then travel back to the States. I have two answers for this. First, it's silly to have them stay in the country this long for two nights' work. If I go overseas for three or four days, my answer is simply to keep myself on US time as much as I can. Even if I time-shift, it doesn't take me a week to shift back when I get home. There are other adjustments you can make, such as using a scrub player for your Japan game and then send him to the minors, or play your next exhibition games in L.A. to take off three hours from the shift.

But I'm sorry, there's no reason for bellyaching about the Red Sox being penalized by the schedule. If the Sox don't win the pennant, nobody is going to go back and say they lost it somewhere over the Pacific. Besides, ownership has to be happy selling all that swag.

We went on the road, we're 1-1. If they get back to Boston a game over .500, it's all good.

Labels: baseball, Red Sox, sports

So the lefties think they won a battle at Forrest Lake HS this week - they may have won the battle but they are questionable on their war to destroy the USA.

Their latest slogan is another twisting of words. I won't give them traction but here's the counter:

US soldiers are agents of stability, agents of security, therefore agents of peace.

No nation on the planet can exist peacefully or be free without stability and security. The left thinks it takes only money - we'll we've poured billions into Palestine and what has it done - raise 5 year olds who think murdering innocents is cool. Give me a break!

Go US Soldiers!

Labels: US Soldiers

This is a followup to this morning's post. Many of you know, after promising Pete Hegseth, a Forest Lake HS graduate, and his Vets for Freedom Tour an audience with 150 social studies students, the principal, Mr. Stassey, cancelled the session. Why? He claims there were parents and "others" who said it was a political event.

Since when does providing our youth with stories of real heroes equal politics? When the left gets so scared to hear the truth, they need to resort to intimidation. Unfortunately, far too many of our so-called educators, for a variety of reasons, have little or no backbone. I'll discuss why in another post.

Tonight, there was a SRO crowd at the Fort Snelling Officers Club. We heard from Pete, Mike Baumann, the MN Chair of Vets for Freedom(VFF), and some truly great American heroes - people who saved the lives of thousands of Iraqis based on their dedication, skill, leadership, and true American spirit. The photo at the top says it all - it's just too bad too many of our educators and media are afraid to hear good news about Americans. This is a war with worldwide members of a culture that is so ill it raises its kids to murder and maim, with a promise for heaven. Just think people, how sick is this? We raise ours to live. We will win this war but it will take longer than necessary because of the cowardice displayed by far too many teachers and others on the left.

The shot below shows the crowd early - by the time all arrived, there was not an empty space on the floor. The kids above - their dad is a real hero.

Labels: US Soldiers, veterans

The announcement of Jim Bullard to lead the St. Louis Federal Reserve is a happy point for us at SCSU. He was a double major in economics and in quantitative methods and information systems from us in 1984. I remember him coming during his grad school years to SCSU to give a paper to our department -- he graduated just before I came to St. Cloud -- and I thought his research then was already outstanding. His resume is one piece of evidence I am a decent judge of talent.

He replaces longtime president William Poole, who is retiring after ten years. The St. Louis Fed has a reputation for a high-quality research program and an advocacy of price stability extending back to the 1960s. It's a big task Jim faces, and he recognizes.

As the Eighth District charts its course for the future, I plan to focus on a few key areas by building upon the St. Louis Bank's strong economic research tradition; continuing to provide world-class, relevant economic information and education; enhancing the Bank's outreach to industry and university economics programs; and gathering and disseminating information used for economic policy decisions.

Good luck and congratulations from St. Cloud!

Labels: economics, SCSU

It is a very sad state of public education in the USA when school officials expose elementary school children to sexuality issues, AIDS, gay rights etcetera over the vehement objections of parents who wish to protect their children from this type of material at an early age

but

the same institution prevents high school students from being exposed to heroes, bonafide heroes, who are trying to protect the very system that that will not let them speak.

Forest Lake High School in Forest Lake, MN, home of Vets for Freedom Executive Director, Pete Hegseth, pulled the cowardly move of the day by refusing to let the national tour of Vets for Freedom meet with 150 social studies students. The excuse is listed here, it's very lame.

I hope the Forest Lake residents remember this when the next school board elections occur. You can voice your frustration with the superintendent, Lynn Steenblock by calling him at 651-982-8103. You can also reach the school board members here.

Labels: education

So I get an invite to a Dennis Prager talk from the station tonight, as did all of NARN. Late last week we were asked to put forward someone who will emcee the event. I had never seen Prager talk before and thought it a good thing to see (I had met him ever so briefly onces before, at a state fair event.) So I accepted the ticket, but, given I had to teach late this PM and worried about traffic, thought it would be better if someone else did this. Usually, you cannot keep Mitch away from the microphone and he's better at it anyway.

I had not planned on having dinner because of the schedule anyway, so I was surprised by light traffic and hit the Northland Inn around 6:15. They get me a seat in the dinner anyway, I get to talk a minute with Prager -- who is as nice as you would expect if you listen to his show; he says there's no radio-Dennis vs. real-life-Dennis, and from what I see that is right. I get my chicken (no use to this vegetarian, and at this stage not replaceable so I did without a main course), push it aside and talk with Fraters three and Nih(i)list. Over comes station management: We need someone to stall for Dennis, he's running late. (The dinner guests were to get personal pics with Prager, more on which in a minute.)

Now, walking into a room of 40-75 people and talking for 10 minutes is easy, and a studio with just a mic and a producer, well, that's fun. But this thing was sold out, and I had no idea how big the ballroom was. Something "sold out" placed in the "Grand Ballroom" isn't likely to be 75 people.

It wasn't. It was 600. And save for the picture-takers wandering down in twos and threes, it was full.

It was at this point I realized, there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Or even a chicken you gave away.

I suppose I did OK. It did not help that one of my Celtic heroes, Wolves GM Kevin McHale, was in the audience in the front row, or that the room was darkened and a bright spotlight was on the podium. But in and out, maybe three minutes tops (they wanted ten, and I think my facial expression in response convinced them that was not a good idea.) Apparently I did well enough that they had me give a minute as a close to get Prager out of the hall without being stopped by 50 fans.

Me, I got five on the way out.

Labels: AM1280, NARN

The closed DeSoto bridge sits about 300 yards from my office up the river. It is one of three bridges within about three miles of each other, with a fourth a few miles further up that was just finished connecting St. Cloud and Sauk Rapids. Everyone thought that last bridge was wa-a-a-ay overdue for replacement; the new structure is visually pleasant. But not very busy. While traffic so far has been pretty light due to the holiday (there was a fender bender at 9am this morning on the Veterans Bridge, two blocks north of DeSoto, but it was gone when I crossed it at 9:35), I think tomorrow will be the first real test.

Veterans Bridge was built in its current form in 1971, and was redecked and widened to four lanes in 1996. Traffic was routed for some time to DeSoto. We have thus had experience with having a bridge out. While St. Cloud has grown dramatically in the last ten years, most of the growth is either on the west side of the river anyway, or is up in Sauk Rapids and comes over the new Sauk Rapids bridge or the University bridge (to the south of Desoto -- many old-time Sauk Rapidians I know that come to campus use that bridge instead.) Most of the Sauk Rapids traffic will now come in over the SR bridge, but it then gets caught in a pinch to two lanes in North St. Cloud (between 11th and 15th Sts. North.)

Personal note: Littlest ends her schooling in Sauk Rapids this May; for the last two years that particular area has been our personal issue. The new bridge, as I say, is nice!

The east side of the river would more naturally commute west than the other direction. There are 15,703 on the east side of St. Cloud as opposed to the more than 50,000 living on the west side; the downtown and the shopping areas are mostly congregated to the west. (Data via ZipSkinny, h/t: Carpe Diem.)

Everyone up here is still wondering -- replace or repair? The key point most people should keep in mind is that there are plans to both widen the University bridge (a long story of slow-growth advocates winning a battle and losing a war, but that's another blog post some day) and renovation of Highway 23 through downtown and out about halfway to Crossroads mall at the other end of town. Both of those other projects were due to go in 2010. The desire would be to handle the Desoto/Highway 23 bridge with the road reconstruction, but you don't want TWO bridges out at the same time and you don't want to repair the road and the bridge separately. So when people ask me what's going to happen, I don't know. It makes far more sense to do the DeSoto bridge first, but that means someone has to agree to move forward the road reconstruction or accept the slow build-out of Highway 23.

It's not going to be pleasant no matter what for those who commute from the east side, but the lack of east side development is actually now a blessing. If that side of St. Cloud had developed like the west and south had, this would be a much bigger disaster.

Labels: Minnesota, St. Cloud

I can scarcely believe this true, except I have it from two sources. One is Psycmeistr, who has the tale told this way:

On Saturday March 8, 2008 State Senator Larry Pogemiller and State Representative Phyllis Kahn held a town a meeting at the Brian Coyle Center in South Minneapolis. The advertised purpose of the meeting was to get feedback from constituents on topics like the state budget, the gas tax and transportation funding. In reality, it was a way for these two long-time DFL incumbents to tell you what they think of your ability (or lack thereof) to think and act for yourself.

Direct from Senator Pogemiller: "I think it's simplistic and naive to say people can spend their money better than the government."and he went on to include... "The notion that everybody can individually spend their money better than government I, I just think is trite, wrongheaded and anti-democratic."

The other was Freedom Dogs, with audio confirming these quotes.

I have a hard time believing anyone could be this arrogant. I was listening to the podcast attached to this post from Cafe Hayek, wherein Russ Roberts debates a physician in favor of single-payer. Russ said something I thought rather profound: We don't want health care, or health insurance. What we want is health. And the question becomes then, who can better help optimize your health. You? Your doctor, whom you pay directly? A committee of doctors? A panel of government bureaucrats? I'm pretty sure most us would not choose the last option.

Because that is the case of people spending other people's money on other people. The track record on that kind of arrangement isn't very good.

For decades I've used the phrase, "Train your brain" to encourage my students and others to learn more. Our nation has lived through 37+ years of telling kids that memorizing dates, facts, languages, etc. really isn't necessary. I use a times table fact test in my college Management Information Systems class. Students who were made to learn the facts do well, the "feel good" only group does not. Poorly performing students usually have to work harder. In my latest class a key reason to learn basic data was driven home.

The night's topic covered the more abstract computer software programs: neural networks, fuzzy logic, artificial intelligence, expert systems, etc. These areas of software development attempt and often succeed in producing products that think and move like humans - imagine robots.

What drove home the incredibly amazing function of the human brain (and my strong belief in the necessity of learning language symbols (alphabets and sounds), math facts, historical dates, geographical features, religious basics, etc.) was this article discussing the chess competitions between the world's greatest chess players and computers. The computer was processing 200,000,000 moves per second, a phenomenal capability. The computer doesn't "consciously" do the calculation. It is programmed to quickly assess a chess situation, "review" data and decide which move to make. Our human brains work much the same way.

The reason we must teach basic facts is this: a fact once learned is in the brain forever. The brain uses the facts it possesses automatically. When cultures developed written symbols for speech, they made rapid advances, therefore we must teach children written symbols to survive today. After memorizing the fact, 7 x 6 = 42, we rarely consciously calculate it but our brain uses that fact millions of time during our lives, naturally. When we commit to memory rivers, imports, exports, mountain ranges, belief systems, major cities, etc. we become able to picture where an event occurs - the necessary associations and correlations simply "appear."

Our brains are our mobile computers. Think of your brain as a muscle. If it is not exercised, it will atrophy. As a species and member of various groups on this planet, we owe it to ourselves and our posterity to make sure our children learn the symbols, math and geographic facts, balanced history, and yes, a foreign language. Only then, after discovering the world of information and committing basics to memory will they really succeed, which in turn gives them real self-confidence.

We deny children life when we make learning only about "feeling good" for one cannot give someone self-esteem - it must be earned and fact learning is the foundation. To really think, to draw conclusions, to understand who and what we and others are results in self-confidence and better decisions. Children know when they don't know. They may not be able to express the frustration but they know. And when they learn, they know they know - they get excited about learning more. My college students who do not know basic multiplication tables are at a disadvantage - because they know they don't know what they intuitively know they should know. This self-awareness eats away at their confidence just as it does with other students. It is time to demand knowledge of basics.

Labels: education

Saturday in the Western Region of the NCAA Basketball playoffs, #7 West Virginia upset perennial NCAA basketball powerhouse #2 Duke University, . The victory for West Virginia came two days after Duke managed to squeak by #15 Belmont 71-70, the final Duke basket occurring with less than six seconds remaining on the clock. Everyone goes after Duke and many people, outside of Duke's enclave and alumni, root for the other team.

During my career at IBM we experienced similar reactions - for a non-IBM company to beat us in a bid, whether it be telecommunications, hardware, software, consulting, etc. people outside of IBM and without knowledge of the environment often rooted for the other company.

In the USA, world leadership - unrequested but thrust upon us, Americans often experience this knee-jerk reaction to go against the USA. If there is anyway to criticize us, it is done, internally and externally. We regularly print half-truths and teach our children that we are really a terrible nation.

Being #1 makes an entity a target - goes with the territory. In Duke's case, they will feel bad, analyze what went "wrong," identify the positive and come up with a new plan. They will be back with force next season. For IBM, we lost sometimes, we felt rotten, we analyzed what went "wrong," identified what worked and went after the next bid. In both environments, people adapted.

My concern for the USA is that far too many, including most of those on the left, only look for what goes "wrong" from their point of view. They spread their negativity anywhere they can. They refuse to look at what worked; they do not appreciate the efforts of those trying to protect us. They ignore the good - it doesn't exist in their world.

Did you ever notice, none of these critics want to leave. Most do not want to return to a home nation. Why? They don't answer - oh they always have some American to blame and imply that if "they are in charge" everything will be better but massive replacements of anything rarely produce success. Not one socialist system has worked, not one - but many have resulted in millions, tens of millions of deaths.

If Duke players and coaches spent their entire season each looking only at their mistakes, if IBMers only looked at sales failures, if Americans are told and taught only what the press doesn't like, if Americans refuse to teach and learn what we have done well, and if in any of these areas someone tried to instill an unwarranted guilt on the team, the salesmen, the nation, in every situation, the individual and group loses.

The US remains one of the most self-critical nations that has ever existed. Because of this freedom of expression, people feel they are free to take shots at us without any obligation to place things in context.

It is time to realize that though we have much, we have never been an imperialist nation. We fix our major problems. We have advanced the cause of freedom everywhere. My foreign students remind me every semester - they come here for freedom: religious, educational, job opportunity, etc.

Maybe it's time those who are so negative, for whatever reason, to try living somewhere else - six months would do it. Maybe then, they will realize what we have is a true gift; that what we have is what so many people desire and our constant self-critiquing is just wrong. We are a beacon - we must keep the light burning. We must be responsible to ourselves, our children and others.

Labels: America

Like Angus, I read this article from the WSJ this morning and laughed heartily. My co-editor has an article in the book on happiness measurement which takes this literature to task, and I won't refer to it yet. But here's my question -- how do you ever know if happiness went up or down? "Gross national happiness rose 2.8% in the third quarter, buoyed by an increase in betel nut consumption and an absence of glowing reports on the Yankees' PR push. A sharp rise in showings of RoboCop on Star Movies bucked against the trend."

How are you going to know how your country is doing when your idea of measuring welfare is done like this?

Outside the government high school in Thimphu, 29-year-old researcher Karma Wangdi recently interviewed Bhanaan Humagai, a 16-year-old high school student.

Question: On a scale of 10, how happy are you?

Answer: 8

Question: How stressed are you?

Answer: Somewhat stressed. I am studying for exams.

Question: Have you ever thought of suicide?

Answer: No! (laughs).

Do you code the answer for suicidal thoughts differently if you get laughter with the 'no'? And there are different kinds of laughs available.

Seriously, we know from Easterlin that happiness doesn't increase even when income increases greatly, when looking over long periods of time. So periodic measurement of happiness is either going to be a measure of what have you done for me lately, or is going to be used to denigrate economic growth as traditionally measured. Given Angus' observation that

the only concrete policy steps taken to raise it are (1) a smoking ban, (2) a dress code, and (3) setting limits of how much of the country can be developed.

...we can infer which it will be.

Labels: economics

Mark Thoma notes that the composition of Federal Reserve governors and presidents is quite red.

Of all the members of the Federal Open Market Committee, five members of the Board of Governors (usually seven, but two sets are currently empty) and twelve district bank presidents for a total of seventeen, how many were appointed under Democratic presidents?

Answer: There is just one, William Poole of the St. Louis Fed...

And Poole, an inflation hawk if there ever was one, is stepping down at the end of the month. Both Thoma and Felix Salmon say there is little doubt that this isn't about politicizing the Fed:

Clearly there's a lot of politics surrounding the area of fiscal policy concerned with tax cuts. And there might be a very weak correlation between the hawk-dove spectrum and the Republican-Democrat spectrum. But it's very easy to think of Republican doves and Democratic hawks. And the Fed, in particular, seems to have done a very good job of remaining genuinely independent, which is one reason why Greenspan's testimony in favor of the Bush tax cuts was so very shocking.

Justin Fox expands on the point, noting the salaries of presidents over governors probably leads to less presidential turnover. But he doesn't think the turnover and the current composition reflects any partisanship.

But that doesn't mean the choices of governors and presidents aren't influenced by political considerations. A speech back in 2000 by then-Governor Lawrence Meyer contains an interesting footnote:

When Susan Phillips' term expired on January 31, 1998, it took the Administration a year and a half to nominate Carol Parry for that position. Alice Rivlin announced on June 4, 1999, that she would be resigning from the Board, but the President has not nominated anyone to replace her. In the meantime, the President renominated Vice Chairman Roger Ferguson to a full term as governor after the expiration of his short partial term on January 31, 2000. The Republican leadership of the Senate Banking Committee has refused to hold hearings for either the new nominee, Parry, or Ferguson, reserving the opportunity for the new President to make these appointments and therefore possibly to convert the positions from Democratic to Republican appointments. In the meantime, the Board remains below its statutory number of members and could remain so for the many months after the new President takes office, if past experience is any guide to the time it takes to make appointments and get them through the confirmation process.

I posted last November that several Fed appointments are now being held up by Senator Christopher Dodd; these appointments are still awaiting action. Supreme Court justices they are not, but Fed governors and presidents are important, particularly at this time of great uncertainty. We should acknowledge that both parties have participated in using the hold on monetary policy (and even fiscal, in the case of Parry). But we shouldn't accept it.

UPDATE (Saturday): Thanks to Justin Fox for a link. He notes the case of Randall Kroszner's renomination to a full term as governor, which is one of the nominations Dodd is holding up. Kroszner has in fact already testified before Dodd's committee. There's some discussion that Dodd is holding up Kroszner due to the latter's activism on mortgage regulation, which displeases Dodd.

As to Kroszner still voting, I think this isn't unusual. Ferguson continued to be a voting member of FOMC after the expiration of his partial term in January 2000 (example). I can't find a published rule on it, however.

Labels: economics, Federal Reserve

If you've read here for awhile, you know I'm not a very big fan of JOBZ. That said, St. Cloud area business leaders assert that it has saved 970 jobs in the area and added about 610 more jobs. That's not a huge surprise, as Central Minnesota is the fastest growing area for jobs outstate. Some wonder, with good reason in my opinion, whether the jobs they say they have saved.

Smaller towns complain that St. Cloud and Rochester don't need it. That's a bad deal for those two Cities, since the metro-area legislators don't like it. It's thus no wonder that the House DFL plan for closing the budget deficit throws JOBZ (and Q-Comp) on the pyre. That they are both initiatives of Governor Pawlenty just makes it all the better. The smaller cities in outstate are going to complain, but if there's enough cover for killing JOBZ, it will happen.

So it is interesting that while Reps. Gottwalt and Haws are trying to protect JOBZ for the benefit of St. Cloud according to radio reports -- Haws asking for revisions to improve efficiency, but no indication of using it as a funding source for deficit reduction or supporting other spending -- Sen. Tarryl Clark is disagreeing with the Governor's budgetary choices, without mention of how she would pay for this. Is she therefore siding with the metro DFL in axing a program that doesn't help Metro? If so, whose interests is she representing? She may be cheering the Husky fans with handouts of the renovated National Hockey Center, but she doesn't seem to say anything about how that is to be paid.

If she would like to take a stand to say JOBZ should be axed, or should be amended as Rep. Haws has, that's one thing. Killing the program, though, seems to go against the interests of the St. Cloud area.

Labels: DFL legislature, Minnesota, St. Cloud

From our administration:

For Christians, Good Friday is a significant day of religious meaning. Tomorrow is Good Friday, but it is also a normal day of classes and open offices. There will be students, faculty and staff who are using appropriate means to observe their faiths. As we are a community that supports pluralism and diversity, please respect the religious observance of those who celebrate the conclusion of Holy Week.

I don't know; it feels a bit contrived, particularly the "using appropriate means". What would constitute inappropriate means, and what should be the campus' reaction to that? And if there are inappropriate means for observing Good Friday, are there also ones for observing religious holidays of other religions? I don't know, like I said. It is well-intentioned, I'm sure. I just don't know that this is a good sign. I would not like an administrator deciding which of my Good Friday traditions are appropriate.

Meanwhile, the protest I wrote about yesterday appears to have started a conversation on campus; most people seemed to think it was simply no big deal. I did put the question of a public expression area to them on our campus discussion list -- so far, no discussion. That is assuredly NOT a good sign.

Labels: SCSU

As I'm getting ready for my masters' level macro class, I read this.

U.S. Treasury three-month bill rates dropped to the lowest since at least 1954 as finance company CIT Group Inc. drew on $7.3 billion in credit lines after being shut out of short-term funding markets.

Investors pushed the rate as low as 0.387 percent as the loss of investor confidence in credit markets deepened. Surging demand for Treasuries is causing failures to deliver or receive the securities to climb to an almost four-year high in the $6.3 trillion a day repurchase, or repo, market.

``The market's insane,'' said David Glocke, who manages $75 billion of Treasuries at Vanguard Group Inc. in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. He sold bills maturing in one week at a 0.05 percent yield. ``The biggest thing overall is the flight to quality.''

Three-month bill rates ended the day 1 basis point higher at 0.57 percent as of 2:57 p.m. in New York. They had tumbled 32 basis points yesterday. Rates on three-month bills were as high as 4.29 percent as recently as Oct. 15.

Krugman says liquidity trap.

I spent a segment of this morning's show on KNSI reading through Craig Westover's column on the Governor's Health Care Transformation Task Force. My first reaction: Any time you hear the words "government" and "transformation" in the same sentence, you can bet the outcome will include the use of coercion. Craig and I are on the same page.

"Successful transformation of Minnesota's health care system will require active participation and engagement from consumers, employers, health care providers, health plans and government," declares the Task Force Report. The obligations the Task Force envisions for the first four groups require fundamental behavior change; government's obligation is to "enact the necessary changes to law to implement the transformation plan." In other words, supply the muscle, the force, the coercion.

Craig has just posted part II of this essay. The report from the task force calls for competition and patient-centered care, but it cannot deliver:

"Competition" logically means individual health care providers competing for individual patients on quality and price based on the individual's conception of value — much like Lasik surgery works today. Independent Lasik surgeons have had to innovate, improve their procedures, upgrade their technology and lower their prices to attract patients. Lasik surgeons operate outside the managed care payment system.

In the task force world, "competition" is "managed." Under the task force payment reform plan, health care providers must bid as low as possible for a contract to serve a population of patients offered by a managed care organization. Think of it like putting out a bid to provide computer maintenance: The task force approach is health care on an industrial model where we carbon-based units are maintained and repaired according to the manual. Unfortunately, we are not all the same make and model.

In the task force health care system, a provider's profit depends on how "efficiently" it provides medical treatment. The provider can be "efficient" by developing innovative treatment methods or by rationing the treatment it provides. Which method the provider chooses has great consequences for the patient, but from the task force's perspective of keeping costs down, either approach would yield "high value health care."

And, lest the Transformation Task Force leave any minor detail of your life untouched, it would require every Minnesotan to have a minimum amount of health insurance, dictate to health plans whom they must cover for what at what price, and create a health insurance exchange that effectively would eliminate the role of private insurance brokers.

The beginning is HF3391, a bill wending its way through the Legislature now. The Lady Logician highlights the backdoor to universal care. All four of these links should be on your reading list.

Labels: health care, Minnesota

It appears I have been replaced by a canary and a colander. For the record, calendar soup tastes like lentil soup.

I have no idea why I landed on TDS last night, as I'm not a fan of the show, but this was hysterical.

Labels: economics

Filling in for Don Lyons, 6-8 AM on Newstalk 1450 KNSI. (Don's calling the Huskies in the Final Five, including tomorrow night's game versus the Gophers.)

We'll be taking the week off on Final Word, and we'll instead replay the interview with Governor Pawlenty. You can get the podcast if you can't wait.

Labels: Final Word, KNSI

It being after all the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and it being that I work on a college campus, I expected to see some campus protesters today. And sure enough they were there, marching about inside my building. "What do we want? Peace! When do we want it? Now!" It was that typical nostalgia for the Sixties that the modern student learns (some dare call it "critical thinking".) Students and faculty alike mostly were annoyed by the loud chanting, which interrupted many classes. There were calls made to campus security, but I never saw an officer come over to our building. The students left within fifteen minutes at any rate.

As someone observed, we have on our campus public expression zones. When the fire-and-brimstone preacher comes to campus, he's required to stand in the zone. Nobody seems to want to hold these students to that standard. Why?

Labels: free speech, SCSU

Craig Westover points to the flaw in thinking about the bonding bill.

The emphasis is on “How much CAN we spend?” not “How much MUST we spend?”

I spoke this morning to a group of about fifty bankers, social workers, financial counselors and others on strengthening financial stability. In the process of doing this I was looking at materials we use to teach economics to kids in K-6 and 7-12 education. (My strategy is to reach the parents through the kids.) There were worksheets on how much of what we spend is discretionary versus mandatory, how much is fixed versus variable, etc. This is all pretty standard fare for teaching financial literacy. (I grabbed most of what I used from the Fed's education site.)

Now what about that logic applied to government? Craig's right -- we have both sides of the political debate agreed to borrow -- to "put on the credit card" -- 3% of what government takes from us. And we will be expected to pay the bill on that credit card. All that we teach in getting new families, families in financial distress, about financial literacy is contradicted by what their government does. Imagine if an employer were to take a share of your labor; he has signs around the plant announcing that you should be willing to pay more for a better Minnetaxco, Inc. He then announces that he is borrowing and additional 3% of what he has taken from you to "make investments" in Minnetaxco. To repay that loan, he will have to take a slightly larger share of your labor. There's interest to pay. But no worries, he is allocating those borrowed funds to help you produce more (which, of course, he can get a share of.)

Government doesn't calculate investment returns. At best, if it followed Craig's advice, it would do a cost-benefit analysis. But it has so many decisions to make about who's benefits count, and whose costs count. You cannot expect a government to calculate investment when it has no conception of risk of loss. It bears no risk. You do.

Craig continues:

If the bonding bill at that point is a mere $600 million, then that’s the appropriate and legitimate level of state bonding. If indeed everything on the list is both constitutional and necessary and the total is $1 billion, well, then we have to look for other sources of revenue – first eliminating extra-constitutional or unnecessary expenditures elsewhere in the budget.

To say we must know how much we have to spend before crafting a bill is simply indicative of the political division of spoils that is the bonding bill.

And that really is the issue here. The 3% is not a fund for investment in infrastructure; infrastructure is the vehicle to which we attach a spoils system that sees you as the source of the spoils. It only uses roads and bridges as a means of keeping you acquiecent.

Labels: legislature, Minnesota

I had to go back through a few papers to see when more dissent was had in a meeting than this one. It's not all that unusual, it turns out. Belden (JMCB 1989 -- JSTOR link) notes that there were six episodes where three bank presidents dissented on an FOMC vote, and five of the six times all three dissented in favor of a tighter monetary policy (smaller or no decrease in the Fed funds rate target.) Alan Greenspan was much more patient in seeking unanimity in Fed decisions, argues Chappell, McGregor and Vermilyea (2007). WSJ's Economics Blog notes that this is the first time we've had five dissented FOMC moves in a row

In today's case, two presidents "preferred less aggressive action at this meeting". Bank presidents (as opposed to governors) tend to be more concerned with inflation. Given that the market had some expectation of a 100 bp cut, I am quite sure 75 bp was a compromise that was as close as Bernanke could get to a broad majority view. Turbulent times will spread out policy preferences.

I wonder if this is a good thing. Sudeep Reddy says that Bernanke views the dissents as a sign of a more democratic Fed. That would mean that it was more democratic pre-Greenspan as well, since that's the only period I can see where it drops (and I think I have a pretty good handle going back to Arthur Burns.) On the same blog, David Wessel notes a recent paper that argues central banks might talk too much.

The recognition that monetary policy is conducted in an environment of imperfect information is central to understanding both the potential benefits and limitations of central bank communications. It rationalizes the role central bank communications may play in helping to inform private sector decisions and expectations. But it also serves to emphasize that much of the information communicated by central banks is noisy and imperfect.

I noted last summer that Bernanke has been trying to wean financial markets from trying to read too much into Fed statements. I don't think he is trying to confuse markets deliberately, but he's clearly less worried about signaling dispersed policy preferences within the Fed than Greenspan was. Add to this dispersion the several new instruments extended for getting credit into financial markets (the kitchen sink was thrown, one says) and the desire to keep at least a couple bullets in the holster, and that we still need to convince some people that the issue is liquidity, not solvency, I'm calling 75 bp about right. I'd've argued for 50, but you wouldn't have needed to be Alan Greenspan to get me to accept 75.

Labels: economics, Federal Reserve

Not affiliated with the Scholars, but Matt Barton, who teaches ENGL 432/532, Writing on the Web, has students writing a political blog. Greetings to Mr. Barton's students!

Labels: blogging, SCSU

Others are focusing on the Survey USA result that the State Legislature has a 28% approval rating. There's also the result that half of voters said they would be less likely to vote for those legislators who voted for the transit tax.

But, 58% approve the Governor's plan for closing the budget deficit. The crosstabs indicate a 55-28 lead with independents, and the plan is only opposed by self-identified DFLers by a 40-48 spread. The DFL plan has yet to be found.

Attempts to dent the Governor's popularity so far have not succeeded.

Labels: legislature, Minnesota, Pawlenty

The hard drive has some error right where the registry hive is, so I cannot load Windows. I have the hard drive out of the case, in a holder, and am this moment backing up all the files, so my losses are mercifully minimal (I hope.) But it does stymie much of what I can do, particularly at a time when, as Bill Polley puts it, this is a weekend we'll always remember -- and not just because we had Governor Pawlenty on Final Word this weekend (your podcasts here soon I hope!)

In one of the sillier articles I've read, MPR is busy figuring out whether Gov. Pawlenty is qualified for Gold Elite on NWA. They even have pretty graphics. Does anyone check to see what the Legislature did for the month and a half before the Legislature even opened for session?

MPR is measuring inputs. What I care about is output. Has he delivered the production we expect from the governor? And how do I measure that? It's NOT based on how many times he talks with the DFL leadership.

"I've seen more of the former governors than I have of the current governor during the start of session," said DFL House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher.

Kelliher said she's worried that Pawlenty has not been meeting with her or other DFL legislative leaders. She said the last time she met with the governor was on Feb. 13, one day after the legislative session started.

DFL House Majority Leader Tony Sertich said he hopes to see the governor come to the table as budget negotiations intensify.

"I think it's shocking. It would be shocking to Minnesotans to know that their governor and their elected legislative leaders have not been in the same room since the start of the legislative session," Sertich said. "I've seen him more on the Sunday morning TV talk shows ... than I've been in the room with him."

Now, go to the last paragraph for the punchline,

House Speaker Margaret Kelliher acknowledged she hasn't invited the governor to any meetings. She said she'd be happy to hold one in her office if the governor would attend.

So first, he was traveling, they didn't want to invite him to a meeting, but they are criticizing his travel. Doesn't that put a pretty big hole in this story? Second, she is willing invite him to HER office. Would she go to his? He is, after all, the governor.

And he's home tomorrow. How do we know? Governor Pawlenty will be with Michael and me on the Northern Alliance Radio Network on AM 1280 the Patriot. The show begins at 3pm CT, and Governor Pawlenty will join us at 3:30.

Speaker Kelliher? Call us at 651-289-4488 and extend that invitation. Who knows? He might give you his cell, and you could reach out and touch him any time you want.

Labels: Minnesota, Pawlenty

Someone tipped me to a proposed action posted on the Ron Paul meetup board.

A great opportunity has come into our own backyards. Arthur J. Rolnick, Senior Vice President of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve, and Associate Economist with the Federal Open Market Committee, will be speaking at the University of Saint Thomas on Thursday, April 10th, 2008. Mr. Rolnick is coming at the request of the Economics Department to speak and take questions. This event will be open to the public.

As a liberty activist and student at Saint Thomas, I am urging all those who question the policies and secrecy of the Federal Reserve to attend. This is a unique opportunity to confront a man who is deeply involved in the inner workings of the Federal Reserve.

...I am asking all those who care about our increasingly graven [sic] economic future to attend in solidarity and show our dissent for current policy. By attending and speaking up on April 10th, we the people can make an effective impact on the conscience of Mr. Arthur Roln