Almanac: At the Capitol

Leading my Campaign Notebook for this week, Pawlenty's national press blitz from "Face The Nation" this weekend, to FOX News earlier the week, from the Wall Street Journal story and sketch over the weekend.  We should know within weeks if he's the VP candidate. What will we talk about if he's not?

The Pew poll this week was big news. It's a good poll and details how McCain is picking up steam with older and blue collar voters.  It appears the same tightening of the race is happening here in Minnesota. Smart Politics talks about that and how Pawlenty's approval ratings have suffered in his home state with his visible national ambitions.  We'll have video proof of Obama's campaign in Minnesota trying to shore up this weakness with Walter Mondale and Josie Johnson launching a talking to seniors tour.

Then the Senate race, took another mudslinging turn as Coleman and Franken's campaigns tried to show the press they were more open and it was their opponents who were holding back details on unpaid utility bills and unpaid taxes.  As the Pioneer Press' Rachel Stassen-Berger so beautifully and bluntly asked each campaign yesterday "Don't Minnesotans have to choose between a tax cheat and a rent cheat?"  

Finally, Rep. Mark Olson just doesn't go away.  Instead of working at the local political level, now prominent Republicans are coming out against him from Sen. Norm Coleman to the Senate Republican Caucus who said he isn't welcome.  Assistant Minority Leader Sen. David Hann told me "We don't believe that Mark Olson should be a candidate."  When I said his local party chose to endorse him he said "I respect local endorsements, but we don't have to support their endorsement."

First, the harsh words from the most influential Republican blogger in town, Michael Brodkorb, who said earlier this week "When I heard that Representative Olson had been endorsed, I was sick to my stomach." Now his future potential caucus, Senate Republicans, just issued this statement:

Over the last few years, too many Republican office holders, especially in Washington, were given a free pass for personal misconduct because they “voted right.” We could all recite the names. Well, it’s time we go back to holding people accountable.
 
While we respect our endorsing process in the Republican Party, some things rise far above process and party in terms of importance. The integrity and character of our candidates and elected officials are two of those things.

In Senate District 16, Mark Olson won the endorsement. That said, we are all well aware that Mark Olson’s criminal conviction caused him to be kicked out of the House Republican Caucus as well as cost him the party’s endorsement for his House seat.  

It is our intention that Mark Olson, if elected, would not be welcome as a member of our Senate Republican Caucus. This is not a matter of philosophy; it is a matter of character and personal integrity.

For the past six years, the Senate Republican Caucus and the State of Minnesota have been the beneficiaries of exceptionally strong legislative leadership provided by former Senator Betsy Wergin. We see in Alison Krueger an outstanding alternative candidate who, like Senator Wergin, combines excellent conservative credentials with a high degree of personal integrity and character.  

Accordingly, the Senate Republican Caucus will be throwing its full support behind Alison Krueger and encouraging Republicans in SD 16 to vote for her in the September 9th primary.

Here's a very interesting post on our Brain Trust from former Senator Ember Reichgott Junge:

Ethics and Legislator Misconduct: Tread Carefully

I don’t know Rep. Mark Olson well, nor the facts of the recent domestic abuse allegations against him. I do know about managing senate ethics investigations, having co-chaired eight of them involving my DFL senate colleagues in the mid-1990’s.

My recommendation to House leadership: be thoughtful and let due process be your guide. This is no place for grandstanding.

The court proceeding is not yet resolved, and there is no ethics complaint filed against Mark Olson. Olson has had no forum to be heard. Yet, House Minority Leader Marty Seifert took strong action against his fellow Republican caucus member by removing his staff and committee status. Due process was left in the dust, seemingly to make a political point.

What happens if Mark Olson is convicted of a felony in court? He must resign his office. There’s no legal question about that. But what about a misdemeanor? His political future could be up to his colleagues. Rep. Olson may make the decision himself, and tender his resignation. If he chooses to serve, he will likely face an ethics complaint against him.

I don’t know Rep. Mark Olson well, nor the facts of the recent domestic abuse allegations against him. I do know about managing senate ethics investigations, having co-chaired eight of them involving my DFL senate colleagues in the mid-1990’s.

My recommendation to House leadership: be thoughtful and let due process be your guide. This is no place for grandstanding.

The court proceeding is not yet resolved, and there is no ethics complaint filed against Mark Olson. Olson has had no forum to be heard. Yet, House Minority Leader Marty Seifert took strong action against his fellow Republican caucus member by removing his staff and committee status. Due process was left in the dust, seemingly to make a political point.

What happens if Mark Olson is convicted of a felony in court? He must resign his office. There’s no legal question about that. But what about a misdemeanor? His political future could be up to his colleagues. Rep. Olson may make the decision himself, and tender his resignation. If he chooses to serve, he will likely face an ethics complaint against him.

If that happens, Olson deserves to be heard. He has a right to state his case, or his apology, or even his intentions to seek treatment. The Ethics committee takes that into account in recommending consequences from apology to expulsion.

The Senate Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct faced similar situations in 1996, where members pled guilty to misdemeanor crimes involving domestic assault, phone misuse, and other transgressions. We had full hearings, offering an open record for the public. We recommended a range of consequences upheld by the full bipartisan senate. Some of these senators chose not to run again or were defeated. Other senators admitted their transgressions in heartfelt apologies and were re-elected with bigger margins than ever.

Remember: there are many different kinds of misdemeanors. Whatever happens in this case will set a strong precedent for future cases involving future members. In cases of personal misconduct, after fair public record and consequence, is a member’s future in elected office a matter for the House to decide, or a matter for the voters of the district to decide?

As a member of the Senate, I've been a passionate advocate against domestic violence. But the issues here go far beyond any individual case. To the House leadership I say err on the side of due process. Make the public record. Bring in outside judges to help, if necessary. The appropriate penalty will become clear.

The minute this becomes a partisan issue on either side, the House loses credibility as an institution. We’ll see a repeat of what happened with the ethics committee in Congress when House Majority Leader Tom DeLay manipulated it. Ethics became a joke.

We often say “do the right thing.” Thoughtful due process is the path to finding the right thing to do.

And to Republican Leader Marty Seifert: become a leader, not a grandstander. In the end, you’ll be more effective.