Peter Swanson has been called up for active duty military service and will not be able to participate in any partisan political activities as a result. We will greatly miss Peter and the work he has done for SD44. We also honor his service and wish him well in his new duties.
He has one parting request for SD44ers:
Also, there is a vision impaired individual from my precinct (GV-7) who will need a ride to the polls in September (primary) and November (general). He lives in those townhouses just to the East of the Golden Valley VFW on Medicine Lake Road. He likes it if you read the voters guide to him. He prefers to vote at the polls rather than absentee because of the new Help America Vote Act software. Can you see if someone from the 44B side can give him a ride to the polls?
Please drop a note in the comments section if you can help out.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
35W Special?
State Representative Ryan Winkler (DFL 44B--my rep) unveils a proposal to compensate the victims and investigate the causes of the 35W bridge in an opinion piece in today's Star Tribune:
First, the state should act to provide a prompt, fair compensation system for its citizens. Gov. Tim Pawlenty is already exploring this concept, and if the Legislature meets in special session, it should establish a bridge-collapse victims' compensation fund. A similar, much larger, fund was created by Congress shortly after 9/11. That fund was extremely successful -- 97 percent of the families of those killed in the World Trade Center chose to participate. In exchange for their agreement not to sue, the victims of the attack or their families received prompt, fair compensation. In Minnesota's case, the state and insurance companies representing the engineers and construction companies that worked on the bridge should split the contribution to this fund.
Second, the Legislature should appoint a special counsel for its joint committee to investigate the bridge collapse. The mission of the joint committees is to seek the truth and to establish who had any responsibility for the collapse, regardless of political party, branch of government or limits of liability insurance. To deliver on this mission, the joint committee will need a special counsel to perform the investigation in a way that only a prosecutor knows how to do, and the committee must stand ready with the Legislature's subpoena power to back up that investigation.
At initial glance, the first idea is the least egregious of the two. We should have learned by now that finding the truth is not what special counsels do best. Politicizing matters, expanding the scope of the inquiry far beyond its intent, dragging the investigation out for years, and wasting millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars seem to be the core competencies of most of these appointed "special" counsels. This is not what Minnesota needs.
The problem that I have with the victim's compensation fund is that it significantly broadens the definition of "special" events. A terrorist attack on the United States clearly was such an occurrence. But there's a lot of difference between a bridge collapse in Minneapolis and a 9/11 like event.
Where do we now draw the line? What about the fires, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, blizzards, and other disasters that kill and injure people across the country every year? Governments, whether at the local, state, or federal level, are almost always involved in such events to some extent and the it's easy to argue--as Winkler does here--that those victims deserve prompt and certain compensation too. Should we set up "special" compensation funds for them too?
First, the state should act to provide a prompt, fair compensation system for its citizens. Gov. Tim Pawlenty is already exploring this concept, and if the Legislature meets in special session, it should establish a bridge-collapse victims' compensation fund. A similar, much larger, fund was created by Congress shortly after 9/11. That fund was extremely successful -- 97 percent of the families of those killed in the World Trade Center chose to participate. In exchange for their agreement not to sue, the victims of the attack or their families received prompt, fair compensation. In Minnesota's case, the state and insurance companies representing the engineers and construction companies that worked on the bridge should split the contribution to this fund.
Second, the Legislature should appoint a special counsel for its joint committee to investigate the bridge collapse. The mission of the joint committees is to seek the truth and to establish who had any responsibility for the collapse, regardless of political party, branch of government or limits of liability insurance. To deliver on this mission, the joint committee will need a special counsel to perform the investigation in a way that only a prosecutor knows how to do, and the committee must stand ready with the Legislature's subpoena power to back up that investigation.
At initial glance, the first idea is the least egregious of the two. We should have learned by now that finding the truth is not what special counsels do best. Politicizing matters, expanding the scope of the inquiry far beyond its intent, dragging the investigation out for years, and wasting millions upon millions of taxpayer dollars seem to be the core competencies of most of these appointed "special" counsels. This is not what Minnesota needs.
The problem that I have with the victim's compensation fund is that it significantly broadens the definition of "special" events. A terrorist attack on the United States clearly was such an occurrence. But there's a lot of difference between a bridge collapse in Minneapolis and a 9/11 like event.
Where do we now draw the line? What about the fires, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, blizzards, and other disasters that kill and injure people across the country every year? Governments, whether at the local, state, or federal level, are almost always involved in such events to some extent and the it's easy to argue--as Winkler does here--that those victims deserve prompt and certain compensation too. Should we set up "special" compensation funds for them too?
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Who Says You Can't Fight City Hall?
St. Louis Park Activities:
Movie: The Great Global Warming Swindle - 3731
Description:
Westwood Hills Nature Center will continue its conversation with the community about global warming this fall by presenting the film, "The Great Global Warming Swindle." The film shows an alternate viewpoint to the one presented in the showing of "An Inconvenient Truth" earlier this year. The city hopes the films will foster a balanced community dialogue on the topic of global warming. This documentary was produced by Martin Durkin and argues against the scientific opinion that human activity is the main cause of global warming. The movie is 90 minutes long with a discussion to follow the movie.
Ages: 12 Yrs. and over
It's a small victory, but a victory none the less. Crackpots everywhere are smiling in their basements.
By the way, Chad Doughty is now officially "cool" (once again). Should I call Tim Sherno for an update?
Movie: The Great Global Warming Swindle - 3731
Description:
Westwood Hills Nature Center will continue its conversation with the community about global warming this fall by presenting the film, "The Great Global Warming Swindle." The film shows an alternate viewpoint to the one presented in the showing of "An Inconvenient Truth" earlier this year. The city hopes the films will foster a balanced community dialogue on the topic of global warming. This documentary was produced by Martin Durkin and argues against the scientific opinion that human activity is the main cause of global warming. The movie is 90 minutes long with a discussion to follow the movie.
Ages: 12 Yrs. and over
It's a small victory, but a victory none the less. Crackpots everywhere are smiling in their basements.
By the way, Chad Doughty is now officially "cool" (once again). Should I call Tim Sherno for an update?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)