Almanac: At the Capitol

A popular bumper sticker from the 2004 presidential campaign simply stated: "November 2nd," signifying the date of the election and those displeased with the politics and policies of the Bush administration to change course.

Had that bumper sticker — and the election calendar — been in effect in 2006, the 2007 legislative session would have been decidedly different.

That's because the extra week in last year's election may have made the difference in this year's session as the gubernatorial outcome profoundly changed the potential direction of the North Star state. To be sure, as far as momentous media points in politics, Mike Hatch's media meltdown about the ethics of ethanol policy and reporters' loyalties doesn't compare with Ed Muskie's wet tears in the wet snows of 1972 New Hampshire, or even Thomas Dewey's rage against railroad workers that may have cost him some of the union vote and 1948 election. But as far as session 2007 goes, it still is the defining dynamic that resulted in near status quo.

Had Mr. Hatch won, it's likely the legislature would be looked at historically: Historically bad, of course, to many Republicans who would have watched taxes rise to pay for more state spending. Historically good, however, to DFLers hoping that Minnesota would regain its progressive position of investing in health care, transportation and education. The state would have been significantly different not only in 2007, but beyond, as the spending — and taxes — took root.

Instead, a stalemate that vexes voters and politicians alike now stands, as Minnesota again sits out any decisive action on the direction of the state. And it's likely to stay this way for the next several sessions, unless Governor Pawlenty tires to move from the Mississippi to the Potomac as a veep candidate for Senator McCain, or has other political ambitions. Right now, he benefits by emulating the sport he loves, as he plays defense as a goalie from whatever the DFL throws at him.

How the electorate responds in the future will depend on many factors, but the entire legislative grind may make it harder to recruit candidates from both sides, as well as those passionate about the political process, as voters may grow weary of the ordinary threats of special sessions, governmental shutdowns and little action in either direction.

So, the last few months were most affected by a few moments and a slip of the tongue — first by Judi Dutcher, then by Mike Hatch — that may be one of those accidents of history that may not only have framed Session 2007, but 2008 and beyond.

And after years of the legislature proposing and the governor disposing of new initiatives — including transit funding — there may be plenty of time to look for a new series of bumper stickers, including one supporting one party control — or a third party — to avoid a second decade of inaction.

I was in the final stages of my Brain Trust submission yesterday afternoon when I was forced to start all over. As I was watching a legislative hearing on television, I heard the news that Governor Pawlenty had vetoed a bloated earmark-laden bonding bill.

Caught on live-television was Senator Steve Murphy's reaction to being denied access to the all-you-can-eat buffet by Governor Tim Pawlenty.

Who says legislative television can't be exciting?

Senator Murphy was hungry, but Governor Pawlenty politely sent the message to "push away from the table. Put your fork down."

The news of Senator Murphy's very public outburst would be enough for even a novice observer of politics to determine that the wheels are coming off the Minnesota DFL.

But the real political news of yesterday was the end of Mike Hatch showing up to work at the Minnesota Attorney General's office. As reported with great detail over the last week, Attorney General Swanson's office has been firing staffers like the New York Yankees fired managers in the 1980s.

Since 1999, Hatch's out-of-control temper has brought employees to tears and according to one former staffer, Hatch's behavior drove him "to the cathedral to pray."

In today's Star Tribune, Nick Coleman wrote that "an investigation is warranted" into Swanson's office. Politics does make for strange bedfellow as House Republicans and Nick Coleman now occupy the same political position.

In 12 hours, I observed the public temper-tantrum of a prominent DFL legislator, the resignation of Mike Hatch in disgrace, and Nick Coleman and House Republicans becoming political allies.

The implosion of the Minnesota DFL at the Capitol has begun.

Mike Hatch just provided his resignation to Attorney General Lori Swanson. In the letter he said "it is now four months into your administration, and it is appropriate that I submit my resignation at this time." It seems to imply that his position was to help her with her transition. In her own statement Swanson says that she is "grateful for his public service during the transition."

I'd venture this is a PR move rather than a transition completion. Hatch went on to say, "It is apparent that changes I made during my administration are unfairly being attributed to you." This of course is a response to many attorneys recently leaving Swanson's office and her resisting AFSCME's attempts to unionize her office (after the union helped her campaign). Hatch praised his protege by saying her administration has been "fantastic" and she's an "inspiration" to women. He concludes that: "I hope that with this resignation the public will continue to focus on the good deeds that you are undertaking on behalf of ordinary citizens."

No coincidence this comes the same day of a blistering column in the Pioneer Press:

Just have the guts to hand Mike Hatch his walking papers. It's hard, I know. Hatch has been a longtime friend and political mentor. He got you a job way back as a secretary. He has generally served the state well.

But it's time for Mike to go. If he had your absolute best interests at heart, he would do the honorable thing and walk the plank on his own.

 

UNION’S RESPONSE TO HATCH RESIGNATION                                 

By AFSCME Council 5 spokeswoman Jennifer Lovaasen

“Our issues have always been with Attorney General Swanson.  Hatch’s resignation appears to be a first step, but recognizing her workers’ right to form a union is the only true way to resolve the problems.  Workers are hopeful that Attorney General Swanson will now try to rid her workplace of fear and intimidation by recognizing the workers’ right to form a union to address their working conditions.  AFSCME will continue our organizing effort.”

 

As the "Battle at the Capitol" comes to a head in the coming weeks, it is unlikely Republican Governor Tim Palwenty will lose much sleep over his differences with the DFL legislature — at least not insofar as his political standing and political future within the state is concerned. With every stroke of his veto pen, Pawlenty could actually enhance his support statewide, and deepen his popularity among independents and conservatives.

For starters, Pawlenty began this session with some pretty solid numbers demonstrating support for him statewide — despite winning a narrow gubernatorial race last November. Pawlenty defeated Mike Hatch in 5 of the state's 8 congressional districts, even though only 3 Republicans headed to Washington after the vote. Pawlenty also won 41 of Minnesota's 67 Senate districts (61 percent) — including 18 districts that were carried by the DFL.

Secondly, Pawlenty has maintained a strong job approval rating throughout the first three months of the session — hovering in the mid- to high-50s, with disapproval marks now dipping below 40 percent (SurveyUSA, March 2007).

Thirdly, Minnesotans will likely view a Pawlenty veto as the act of a strong executive. When the Humphrey Institute asked a series of questions on candidate image in a poll of likely voters a week before the election, Pawlenty scored very high on "providing strong leadership," with less than 25 percent of Minnesotans giving him negative marks on this measure. In fact, Pawlenty was seen as more strong than honest and more strong than caring in that poll. Even if a majority of Minnesotans disagree with Pawlenty on the details and substance of a bill, they will probably not be tuned in closely enough to find fault with the Governor for vetoing such legislation. What they will take away from a veto is the image of their Governor 'standing up' to the DFL legislature, and demonstrating 'strong leadership' on these issues. By contrast, President George W. Bush was frequently berated for not vetoing a single spending bill that crossed his desk during his first term.

If it seems as though Pawlenty might face a political backlash in vetoing DFL legislation, that is perhaps because he works in a media market that happens to be overwhelmingly Democratic (Pawlenty lost to Hatch by 35 points in the 5th Congressional district and by 14 points in the 4th). True, Minnesotans elected strong DFL majorities into the legislature, but they also sent Pawlenty back to St. Paul; and many voters did both.

Pawlenty is the face of Minnesota politics and his political defiance of the DFL will enhance his credibility as an executive who can make tough decisions. If you are a DFL-er, don't expect his popularity to take a hit anytime soon, so long as his ink well doesn't run dry.