| MINNEAPOLIS—Independence Party gubernatorial candidate Tom Horner spent yesterday attempting with all his might to spin a position on abortion that could not be labeled pro-life or pro-choice. He was successful; his real position is 100 percent pro-abortion. Horner stated that he would not have signed Minnesota's Woman's Right to Know law providing basic informed consent information prior to an abortion procedure; that he supports taxpayer funded abortions; that he does not believe the office of governor should have anything to do with protecting unborn human beings, and that the abortion issue should be handled on the federal level. “As a political spin doctor, you would think that Tom Horner could have come up with a better abortion position than 'I won't be labeled,'” stated Scott Fischbach, Executive Director of MCCL. “If a candidate opposes Woman's Right to Know and wants to force taxpayers to buy other people's abortions, he is clearly not 'in the middle' on the abortion issue, he is pro-abortion.” At his press conference Horner was joined by notorious abortion flip-flopper former Congressman Tim Penny, and former U.S. Sen. David Durenberger, whose politics could best be described as erratic since leaving the U.S. Senate in scandal. Horner also announced the support of longtime pro-abortionist Sally Pillsbury. Horner joins the other pro-abortion candidates—DFL'ers Margaret Anderson Kelliher, Matt Entenza and Mark Dayton—in seeking to replace pro-life Gov. Tim Pawlenty. It is only Republican candidate for governor Tom Emmer who has a 100 percent pro-life record “Tom Emmer is the only major candidate for governor who understands the importance of supporting unborn children and their mothers in our state," Fischbach added. "All of the other candidates support a radical pro-abortion agenda including forcing taxpayers to pay for abortions.” The first release was followed with this one: May 11, 2010 Horner credibility is on the line Pro-abortion stance rock solid “MCCL misstates my position, then attacks me. An organization sacrificing its credibility doesn’t reduce abortion, it just reduces trust.” HORNER2010 - twitter - May 11, 2010 Tom Horner, pro-abortion candidate for governor, is now trying to flip-flop from his pro-abortion stance on the issue of abortion. Yesterday, it was widely reported that Horner stated: “While saying that others could affix the labels of ‘pro-choice’ or ‘pro-life,’ Horner spoke of reducing the number of abortions – comprehensive sex education, including abstinence-based – and said as governor he would not have signed the Woman’s Right to Know abortion provision.” (by T.W. Budig, ECM Capitol reporter) “He (Horner) said it’s up to the U.S. Supreme Court or Congress, not a governor, to decide whether abortion is legal.” (by Bill Salisbury, Pioneer Press) “Horner also said he’s willing to support state funds to pay for a new Vikings stadium, would work to provide marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples and would continue to allow public funding of abortions.” (by Tom Scheck, MPR News Q) The facts are the facts: Tom Horner supports abortion on demand and wants taxpayers to pay for abortions – that is called pro-abortion! A candidate can spin and spin and even tweet all day long. It does not change the fact that Tom Horner is pro-abortion. Only one major candidate for governor of the state of Minnesota respects unborn children and their mothers and that candidate is Tom Emmer. This concerted effort between the MN GOP and the MCCL may be separate independent activities, but not ones seeking a dissimilar outcome. The two groups have the same goal, the election of an anti-abortion candidate. Since GOP endorsed candidate Rep. Tom Emmer (R-19B, Delano) is the only anti-abortion major party candidate the coalition is logical. Readers should also remember MCCL Executive Director Scott Fischbach is a former Republican campaign service provider and the spouse of Sen. Michelle Fischbach (R-14, Paynesville). If the GOP knows the MCCL is willing to do the heavy-lifting criticizing Emmer opponents it adds to the overall effort. Horner is facing a challenge in the Independence Party Primary by endorsement opponent Rob Hahn. Gildea Pick for Chief Judge Last week, we predicted Associate Justice Lori Skjerven Gildea would be Tim Pawlenty’s (R) pick to replace retiring Chief Judge Governor Erik Magnuson. Gildea authored the three member descent in the 4-3 ruling against Pawlenty’s unallotment of the Special Diet Program. She was discussed earlier this wek as one of the three finalist all of whom had sided the same way. Her selection makes Gildea the second female Chief Justice in state history. Her selection also created availability for Pawlenty to select another Associate Justice. His selection is Mark Stras a University of Minnesota law professor, who people are saying submitted a Pawlenty supporting Amicus Curiae on the unallotment case. As predicted a future vote on matters of this type will likely favor Pawlenty 4-3. We called for an independent judiciary last week and are glad others with scholarly minds have done the same. Here is a release on the issue from Rep. Ryan Winkler (DFL-44A, St. Louis Park). THE PAWLENTY PAYOFF “What we’re looking at here is the Pawlenty Payoff. Pawlenty already tried appointing his political pals to serve on Minnesota’s high court, but after last week’s unallotment decision, he’s going the extra mile to stack the court.
“Promoting Justice Gildea was just a big thank you for the loyal dissent she wrote last week defending Governor Pawlenty’s illegal unallotments. The Governor wants another political ally running the court, rather than an impartial legal mind focused on the facts.
“Pawlenty’s appointment of Mr. Stras is even worse. Mr. Stras is a right-wing ideologue who wrote a radical amicus brief supporting the Governor’s illegal unallotments.
“Unfortunately, Mr. Stras’s brief specifically opposed the position of cities in the unallotment case, even as the firm with which he was associated represented those same cities in public finance matters. Hopefully the Supreme Court’s orientation program includes a lesson in basic ethics.
“We hear a lot from the Governor and Republicans in the legislature complaining about activist judges. The hypocrisy in today’s Supreme Court appointments is nauseating, but fortunately both justices are up for election in 2012, and Minnesotans will have a chance to evaluate their performance.” A Global Budget Solution Not Necessary Now The quest for an overall budget solution is not required during this legislative session. The biennium ends on June 30, 2011, not June 30, 2010. The reason legislators are trying to tackle the problem in the first year of the biennium is because there is a longer time to enact the changes and wean the impact out over the course of time. The Minnesota State Constitution also for the state to operate in the red only during the a specific budgetary period, but not carry over a negative balance in a succeeding year. Article XI Sec. 6 states: Sec. 6. CERTIFICATES OF INDEBTEDNESS. As authorized by law certificates of indebtedness may be issued during a biennium, commencing on July 1 in each odd-numbered year and ending on and including June 30 in the next odd-numbered year, in anticipation of the collection of taxes levied for and other revenues appropriated to any fund of the state for expenditure during that biennium. No certificates shall be issued in an amount which with interest thereon to maturity, added to the then outstanding certificates against a fund and interest thereon to maturity, will exceed the then unexpended balance of all money which will be credited to that fund during the biennium under existing laws. The maturities of certificates may be extended by refunding to a date not later than December l of the first full calendar year following the biennium in which the certificates were issued. If money on hand in any fund is not sufficient to pay all non-refunding certificates of indebtedness issued on a fund during any biennium and all certificates refunding the same, plus interest thereon, which are outstanding on December 1 immediately following the close of the biennium, the state auditor shall levy upon all taxable property in the state a tax collectible in the ensuing year sufficient to pay the same on or before December 1 of the ensuing year with interest to the date or dates of payment. We are skeptical this legislative session will result in a compromise. Governor Tim Pawlenty (R) will not accept any form of tax increase and the ability of the House to obtain four votes from the Republicans is unlikely. During his press conference on his new Supreme Court selections, Pawlenty discussed where negotiations stand and what his expectations are. As he talked about the veto of the recent Health and Human Services budget an potential compromise on that issue he discussed the HHS bill in light of an overall budget solution. Pawlenty seeks a ratification of the unallotments he implemented last year, making them permanent as well as enactment of the school funding shifts from 90/10 to 70/30. He also discussed the status of the Pension Bill saying, “It’s on my desk and I am going to hold it for a few days until I know where things are going.” (re: global budget discussions) The DFL legislative majorities want to make sure people think they are working hard to solve the budget crisis, but at the same time want to protect specific constituency groups. The ability to get out of this session without a solution can project the problem into the future and in the future there will be another person in the governor’s office. DFLer’s hope it will be a Democrat, but that assurance is not guaranteed. DFL Dilemma The DFL gamble it made on the budget solution including a fourth tier income tax bracket of 9.10% they proposed last week was whether they are appealing to their own constituency or to the broader electorate. Both legislative leaders are Minneapolis DFLers. Speaker Rep. Margaret Anderson Kelliher (DFL-60A, Minneapolis) and Senate Majority Leader Larry Pogemiller (DFL-59, Minneapolis) have constituencies more open to a progressive tax system. As the DFL Party nominee Anderson Kelliher is involved in a primary fight with former U.S. Senator Mark Dayton (D) and former DFL House Minority Leader Matt Entenza, both affluent, who have called for increases in taxation on the upper tier income bracket. The problem is making this type of appeal may be good in a primary contest, but it is not as helpful in a general election. DFLers who play to type as “Tax and Spend Liberals” play right into the hands of Republicans. The ability to nimbly dance between constituency groups, supporters and the DFL delegates may wed a candidate to a particular primary agenda, which will be hard to defend against in November. These stressed economic times afford little in the debate when the sound bites are fairly well defined. The only saving grace for a DFLer who voted for the budget solution is the issue never passed and hence did not become law and if negotiations fail then starting over in 2011 is a potential solution. Protections Against Bad Property Forfeiture Laws As more information on the inappropriate and illegal activities of the Metro Gang Strike Force come to light legislators are wrestling with issues of public protections and police tactics. We have been following the quest by Sen. Mee Moua (DFL-67, St. Paul) to make sure law enforcement databases are cleansed of racially sensitive data, which can lead to racial profiling. Additionally, there are concerns over the legality of property forfeiture of the accused. There is a bill authored by Rep. Joe Mullery (DFL-58A, Minneapolis) that waters down forfeiture provisions advanced by Rep. Michael Paymar (DFL-64B, St. Paul) and supported by Rep. Tina Liebling (DFL-30A, Rochester). We understand the Minnesota Police Federation has put legislators on notice of their unwillingness to endorse candidates, principally Republicans if they vote for forfeiture provisions that restrict confiscation or sale of items obtained from the accused. We support the idea of ill gotten gains becoming part of the public system, but one fundamental problem exists. If the person accused is either found not guilty or acquitted then their property should be returned to them. The ability to leverage a person possession as a means to extort a confession, or used as ways to implicate others is not a system we support. Extortion is extortion whether done by criminals or law enforcement. | 
