I was surprised, too, Bill — I expected Cox to win, though by a modest margin.
My impression was that he was shooting further right with his campaign than he has with his House campaigns; at least that’s what I’ve gotten from the mailings I’ve received and the some of his comments during the Locally Grown debate. Maybe the district — Northfield especially — was simply not interested in some of those positions.
I could be wrong there, but I honestly don’t know what else it could be. He’s well-liked and has better name recognition than Kevin Dahle.
But now, to put a smile on. It’s been a while since a candidate I supported won.
Yea, Kevin! What resounding support for what you stand for now and what you’ve always represented as an educator, friend, and concerned citizen. I look forward, as does all of our family, to your voice in our State government. Best to you, Beth, and your family as you begin this new journey.
My friends and I were just talking about that; we suggested that perhaps it was that very mentality that Cox was a shoo-in that created apathy among the conservative vote and gave the vote to the DFL. Who knows: this whole scenario seemed really unlikely with the large margin of victory for Kevin.
They’re kind of exciting, you know. And they give Northfield some good, non-controversial publicity (which is better than the controversial kind: teen drug-use stats, city hall, etc.).
I took the photo on the left of Kevin Dahle at about 8:30 PM at Froggy Bottoms, and on the right of Ray Cox and Tom Neuville at about 8:45 PM at Ray’s house:
Gabriel wrote,
“…this whole scenario seemed really unlikely with the large margin of victory for Kevin.”
Judging by lawn-signs alone, you’d have thought Ray was going to have a slam-dunk.
Republican conspiracy-theorists may wonder:
Did some DFL-leaning election judges see to it that all the most disfunctional ballot-counting machines were placed in the Republican-leaning precincts?
Just like the Republicans did in Ohio?
Maybe the ‘publicans should contest this, call for a recount and investigation?
Congrats once again to Kevin!! He does an amazing job at the HS and will do an amazing job in St. Paul. I think Gabe hit the nail on the head when he mentioned apathy among the Republican voters. I also believe that Cox’s platform stressing his experience was one that did not satisfy voters as many are upset over the past years. Yes he has experience, but look what has happened while he was in office. The nail in the coffin had to be Pawlenty coming down to show his support-thanks Tim!
I think folks just got tired of Cox’s “in your face” / arrogant/vote for me or else campaigning. He touted himself as a “green candidate” but filled our mailboxes with 2 or 3 glossy ads PER DAY! Dahle is in - WATCH YOUR WALLET! I’m sure that the proposed .10 per gallon gas tax just got another vote not to mention numerous other new taxes/entitlement spending. Hopefully, the I-R’s will come up with a better candidate the next time(s) around so that Bly and Dahle can return to their teaching duties.
Congratulations to Kevin Dahle, and best wishes for a very successful term as state senator!
I really liked what he had to say at the candidate debate, and I was proud to vote for him, but I have to admit that all the Pro-Cox talk (from Democrats!) here, and all those lawn signs, made me feel that I was only making a symbolic gesture with my vote.
Northfield continues to be a very surprising town.
What wonderful news! I expected the rest of the district to overwhelm any Democratic Northfield bump. Any maps available of voting results? And when was the last time this seat was held by a Democrat?
Loads of Carleton students voting on the first day of classes, walking right past the large red pick-up with plastered with Ray Cox signs parked all day practically across the street from the polling place.
I think there are several reasons for the DFL win.
I think Democrats in general are more excited, more angry at Bush and more united in defeating Republicans in any race. Having the election on Iowa caucus night, when wall-to-wall media coverage of a record-breaking number of Democrats turned out, certainly gave DFL-ers a shot of adrenaline and a reminder to vote.
I think Pawlenty’s timing of the special election seemed such a blatant political move that many people were insulted and enraged. Ray having his campaign materials ready when the announcement was made fueled the feeling of a conspiracy, and God knows people here love to feel they’re fighting evil conspiracies. And my guess is that already eager college voters took it as a personal challenge.
I think many people weren’t voting against Cox, but were determined to control Pawlenty by giving taking away the Republican super-majority.
I think Ray as an individual is a wonderful guy, but there was a sense of Pawlenty trying to shove him down everyone’s throats.
I’m sure Ray never will live down the construction work he did at the newspaper just before an earlier election. It may have meant nothing, but the timing of the job added to the feeling Ray was being forced on the public by an organized power structure.
Interesting. A review of the precinct by precinct voting shows that it wasn’t just students who put Dahle over the top. Dahle won by large margins in every precinct in Northfield, as well as taking Dundas and Bridgewater.
I was watching the Sec of State’s website last night and as of 10:15 all of the precincts except for Northfield’s had reported in. (BTW, what’s up with that?) Cox was ahead by several hundred votes. Northfield’s votes made the difference, obviously.
Over Christmas break, I talked with several Northfield High School grads, now in college, and a couple of current NHS students. They unanimously agreed that Dahle is a great teacher, and a great guy. My son, Nick, thinks that probably half of NHS grads have had Dahle for a teacher. That translates to a lot of face-to-face parent/teacher conferences.
I speculate that years of great work in the classroom translated into votes for Mr. Dahle. Ultimately, that work trumped door knocking/lawns signs/mailings, etc.
Well said, Anne! I believe there is an anti-Republican sentiment nationwide because of Bush.
The many, annoying phone calls from the Republican party urging people to vote in this election I do not believe helped their cause either. No one likes to feel pressured or manipulated.
I also believe that many in Northfield have experienced the negative effects of school budget cuts. Though Dahle is only one voice (though now aligned with a Democratic majority in the state senate), voters could be sure he will make our schools a priority.
It was not only college students voting for Dahle.
I think a big part of Kevin’s votes were from the 18-19 year old high schoolers, and college age students hanging around Northfield still, whom all had him as a teacher at the nhs. I never went to the hs, so I only know him from drivers ed. In which I learned more about the Andy Griffith show than driving laws…. Is he still the president of that club, does anyone know?
Hey Triumvirate - the next election is suddenly coming up very quickly. I’m certainly interested in hearing what my fellow citizens think. It’s not a strictly Northfield issue, but it will certainly affect Northfielders. What about a board for that one?
The Nf stats were amazing. They also showed one of the problems NF faces which is the needed redistricting of the wards/precincts.
It is very difficult to construct the wards so that they fulfill the legal requirements for their “equality”; the three considerations are: equal numbers of residents/voters, contiguity, and “communities of interest”.
When NF was last redistricted there was extreme gerrymandering of the 4th Ward. At a council work session, it was stated that by constructing the boundaries as they exist today, two seated councilpersons would be able to retain their seats. (No “conspiracy; just a council vote)
The result is that the 2 precincts of ward 4 are fairly equal in numbers, BUT have NO contiguity (witness the line running down highway 3 with not a single residence along it) and if you look at the voting patterns, they do not seem to be “communities of interest”.
That said, I think the “communities of interest” requirement is one that is very problematic; it could be interpreted as being a very possibly prejudicial assumption in the determination of that evaluation. (Sorry, didn’t say that well, but I think you get the point). But looking at the votes from precinct 1 of ward 4, compared to those of precinct 2 , you can see a
huge difference in the voting preferences. Does that show…. ? Well, what does that show?
Statisticians, please weigh in here.. Bruce, are you out there? Am I remembering correctly that you, Felicity, are a statistician?
I think this is a fascinating question , and has real ramifications for the 4th Ward ever electing a candidate which represents both precincts satisfactorily
Kevin won because he is a great educator, articulate, kind and well respected. If you saw the debate it was obvious that Kevin was well schooled on the issues.
Didn’t Cox lose against Bly, in the most recent election cycle? In that race he had alot of signs and letters to the editor as well. But as Edwards said last night– the people decide, it doesn’t matter how much people spend or out spend. The people decide! Plus, from my perspective, these Republicans who try to say they are “moderate” and then vote with the party almost always, aren’t sneaking through. (Watch Coleman try to act like he is a moderate..)
We the people!
Wellstone would be proud! Finally, grass roots politics seems to be taking hold. Sitting in Prof. Wellstones “Grass roots organizing” class in 1985 I thought much of it was a dream or thoughts of dreamers. But the internet really seems to be bringing many of those ideas and strategies to fruition.
Did student votes in Northfield determine the election?
Not likely, in my opinion.
A back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that in the Northfield wards with significant campus overlap (W1P1, W1P2, W3P1, W4P1) the total vote went about 400 for Ray and 1475 for Kevin. That’s a big margin — but not even close to the 1600-vote margin for the total election. These wards also include many, many non-student voters.
So, almost certainly, the result would have been the same even if *no* student had voted.
My best guess is that the election result occurred not because of nasty bloggers, questionable endorsements, push-polling, glossy ads, or other campaigning peculiarities. Seems to me we had two good, credible, well-liked, and locally well-known candidates. But they have different party affiliations, and in present political circumstances and in this district, Republicans have to swim against the current.
That doesn’t seem like a huge difference in voter preference.
Seems like all the ’suburban’ areas of Northfield went for Dahle at strong levels. And he carried the liberal bastions of Shieldsville, Northfield township, Erin township, Bridgewater township, Dundas and tied in Wheeling township. Something going on here that’s for sure.
Now THIS is how an election should look in this district. It’s consistent with the index, and as the prior commentor noticed: “My best guess is that the election result occurred not because of nasty bloggers, questionable endorsements, push-polling, glossy ads, or other campaigning peculiarities.” I’d say it had a lot to do with the ABSENCE of these things (except for all of Ray’s glossy ads, and it’ll be interesting to see how much personal money he put into his campaign because in a prior House campaign, he’d loaned his campaign over $8k, which is $3k over the House limit, and wasn’t called on it). There wasn’t the Republican push-polling this time, there were no Sviggum-directed dirty press conferences in the dump and no baseless threats of felony prosecution for serving pie, instead it was a CAMPAIGN. Dahle had to make a name for himself and get the word out about his and his party’s positions, Ray had the disadvantage of having a prior voting record that spoke volumes about how he’d perform. This is a satisfying result. Now the big question is whether the DFL will act, or whether they’ll cave as they have in Washington. Given the House last session, and given the lack of leadership and the participation of the DFL in wrongheaded policy, hand in hand with our chameleon-”green” governor, particularly on energy issues, I’m not too hopeful, but will be there prodding anyway. It’s a world where DFL House Energy Chair called me in to tell me “we need more coal” and where Sen. Ellen Anderson champions Energy Omnious bill after Energy Omnious bill that facilitates transmission lines and more coal, oh, and maybe a little wind. It’s going to take a big consistent push to turn this battleship around. Maybe this is a sign???
Paul’s right. The much worried about student vote was only incidental to the margin. It is interesting that only 41 of ~300 votes at Carleton were for Ray, which in my mind is indicative of the fact that Northfield is sooooo out of touch with the rural voters (the margin was reasonably close without the Northfield vote). I’ve long been claiming that Bridgewater’s undertaking of planning and zoning represented a long simmering frustration with a remote urban-oriented county’s poor managing of the rural needs, now it looks like I can add Northfield to that list of remote and disconnected entities (don’t even get me started on how remote and disconnected the state and federal arms are). Oh well.
Curt asked why Northfield was the last set of precincts to report in. At the Cox residence we knew the results in the Northfield area long before they were posted. Apparently Northfield does not want anyone to forget that Northfield rules this part of the country, and we rural types ought to be more attentive to our place, that is, we better just sit down and shut up. By waiting until all other results were in, then almost casually, but certainly arrogantly, showing up with their votes and essentially saying to the rest of us “oh, why did you even bother, you little peasants”, the city continues its tradition. (Cautionary caveat, I’ve just read Mari Sandoz’s “Life of Crazy Horse” and I totally empathize with his struggle to protect a way of life that simply was not important to the hordes from the east.)
One common goal for the group in control of the gerrymander is to build districts in which your side can expect to win lots of districts with 52% or so of the votes, while concentrating as many of your opponents’ voters as possible into districts where they will win a smaller number of seats, but will win each of those seats by (ideally) margins of 90% to 10%.
Unfortunately, concentrating groups of voters is sometimes cynically defended as creating “communities of interest.”
Redistricting is an incredibly complex area both of politics and of statistical science. There’s a whole branch of statistics devoted to understanding geographic data (like voter rolls) that can and undoubtedly is used to draw districting maps. There is also a large body of law on the matter of districting that says what can and can’t be done. But all of that is well outside my areas of expertise.
However, it’s very hard to know what’s the right way to draw districts. No matter how you draw then, some interests will have their influence increased, and others will have their influence diminished. My personal first instinct would be to turn it over to a computer with simple arbitrary rules, and let the chips fall where they may. I would think the rules for such a plan would favor geographic contiguity and compactness and little else. However, such districts would potentially shift radically with each census, as populations move and neighborhoods are built. Also, what does “compact” mean? Do you want to consider geographic obstacles like rivers, or man-made ones, like highways, when considering where to divide districts? “The other side of the tracks” may well separate “communities of interest” from each other.
My point is, redistricting is one of the most important, and least well-delineated, processes in our democracy. Thus far, the principle in this country has been based on letting the majority rule. If one party takes it too far one way, at some later date, it is hoped that the other party will get a chance to rewrite it.
The 2000 census redistricting is a case in point. The Republicans controlled that process in a majority of states, and they carefully constructed a minimum number of “very safe” Democratic districts, and a maximum number of Republican “pretty safe” seats. It was great for 2004, and it was part of the foundation of the promised “permanent Republican majority” that we heard a lot about just a few years ago. Unfortunately for them, a small-but-generalized shift away from the Republican party in the last few years turned a lot of those “pretty safe” Republican seats into a large number of “up for grabs” or even Democratic-leaning districts. And thus, the Republicans lost a lot of House seats in 2006, and are widely expected to lose even more in 2008.
The art and science of drawing district lines would be a great topic for Politics and a Pint, if anyone’s up to the task. I, for one, have no idea what the right answer is.
Were you serious (in posting #29) about attributing the relatively late appearance of Northfield voting results to arrogance, elitism, dissing the “peasants”, etc.?
Perhaps such “city” attitudes exist (as do, presumably, “country” attitudes about godless, libertine liberals here in Rice County’s Gomorrah), but I need a little more evidence than the order of posting of election results. Could it instead have something to do with the larger voting numbers in Northfield precincts? Or a malice-less glitch of some type?
William of Ockham (the 14th century Razor guy, but not a slasher) must be turning in his grave.
Yes, Paul and Bruce are right above, the students weren’t a big part of this win, though of course like every voter, they contributed to itl Special elections are atypical, and only those who feel strongly about the single race at issue will turn out.
I’ve just run through the results, by County and by Pct., and what stands out is Ray lost every precinct in Northfield, even those that were traditionally “Ray’s” in past races, that applies to Northfield, but also take a look at the townships in 25B, Shieldsville, Wheeling and Bridgewater. Bridgewater was a Ray stronghold, and he lost big-time. He didn’t do at all well in 25B, which points to dissatisfaction, probably from varying perspectives, in his performance as Representative. Norgaard’s votes could have made a difference if they all would have been Ray voters, but as Ralph Nader notes, third parties take from both R’s and D’s. And it’s good Norgaard was in the mix, though he probably didn’t have the resources to mount a fast and furious campaign. The third voice brings in issues and perspectives that aren’t usually present, keeps everyone on their toes, and perhaps a little more honest.
Seems a pretty good campaign and election all the way around. The campaign finance reports, when they appear, will make it even more interesting.
The conspiracy theory types who believe that the election was timed to minimize student votes might want to consider another element: Maybe the black helicopter boys “out geniused” themselves on this one. There were a lot of college students still home on break on election day. These were local kids, personally educated by Dahle. A lot of colleges don’t start up again for a couple of weeks. Were they a factor???
Along the whimisical remarks line, Carol, you’ll appreciate this one. Several months ago I googled “Occam’s razor” and the Google context-specific ads came up with this.
I keep in on my desktop and call it “Occam’s Norelco.” (Click the photo for an actual definition for “Occam’s Razor”)
Curt - That ’s a point, not just whimsical! I’d guess that it is a factor here, particularly the legions of Northfield parents who have dealt with Dahle as he dealt with their kids, the votes reflecting their impression of his character and values!
I concur with many of the comments about Pawlenty’s support for Cox. This was a calculated election by the Republicans thinking Cox was a slam-dunk in this district hence nominating Neville for the judgeship. It certainly backfired on them. But let’s give Northfielders credit for seeing thru this smokescreen and recognizing that Pawlenty only wanted Cox in the Senate to thwart any attempt of a veto. Cox championed himself as a bi-partisan, independent representative but everyone recognized he was solidly in Pawlenty’s back pocket. The correct and “only” choice was Kevin Dahle, and he will represent us well. Congrats!
Thank you, Patrick , for a lot of in-depth thoughts about the creation of voting districts; it IS a fascinating subject, to my mind… and I know it was to the mathematicians that helped the League of Women Voters with the redistricting of Rice County court case, a few years ago.
I’d like to hear more of your thoughts on the “communities of interest” issue; I consider that very problematic, and would be interested to know a historic perspective of how that qualification originated.
You’re oh , so right, about this being a good subject for Norm’s Politics and a Pint…. why don’t you propose it to him, and offer to lead the discussion?
I think you are right, Paul Z., the election was won by Dahle and his volunteers, and not by bloggers, etc.
I think today’s political issues are driving the dem vote.
Carol, this election showed that Cox lost the last election, too, and that Dems are even more determined.
Also, along the lines of the landslide: Northfielders vote, and rural people most likely didn’t have a personal connection with any of the candidates, and this was a SpecElect. Traditionally, only certain people vote.
I noticed that Ward 2-2 voted heavily Dem. That is true with tradition, and good to see. My parent’s lived in 2-2 and it heavy Dem, and then it was Rep. for a while. Last House election it went Dem, if I am not mistaken. SO, it says something about the new builds out past Jefferson.
Yikes. Is that your ax grinding, or are you just unhappy to see this result?
Isn’t it safer to assume that Northfield’s results were last to report because of the much higher vote count? Opposed to, say, Dennison, where 4 votes were cast? This might be especially true if city election officials decided to submit results as a group - one time, rather than individually by precinct. I don’t know if that’s their process, but it seems to me to be one way they might operate.
I think your characterization of Northfield as “arrogantly” telling rural voters to “sit down and shut up” denigrates all voters and election officials of Northfield, and reflects only your bias, not reality. You’re usually so much more reasonable and thoughtful than that.
As for Northfield being “sooooo out of touch with the rural voters”, isn’t that also accurately expressed as rural voters being sooooo out of touch with Northfield? Or does your ax only cut one way?
Wm. S. post # 27… I’ll have to go back and look at the precinct tallies; maybe I remembered them incorrectly as it was early this AM, after a late night , and I hadn’t even finished my FIRST cup of tea….
I was recalling about a 50% point spread , Dahle over Cox in Ward 4 pct. 1; and about a 30+ % point spread in Ward 4 pct. 2……. that seemed a significant difference …. Maybe I was wrong?
I have to admit that my son’s comments about Kevin Dahle influenced my voting decision. He said that Mr. Dahle was one of the best teachers in the school, not because he was “easy,” but because he “made you learn.”
At conferences I sometimes questioned his dry sense of humor, but I also knew he was dedicated to teaching and doing his job well. He was not there to impress the parents but to teach the kids.
In that way, I have faith that Dahle will have the same dedication to his job as senator. Yes, his character and values were an important part of my decision as they are for all I choose to vote for.
I am a little miffed at the name calling that has gone on in the blogs on this site. I hear that votes for Dahle were from either citizens who have no investment in this community (ie. St. Olaf and Carleton students and students home from college) or are out of touch with the “rural types.” I have to say that I do not fall into either of those categories, and neither do I consider myself a liberal.
Frankly, it is actually interesting to me that many of the rural communities voted Republican being the Democratic party is traditionally known as the farm labor party. It is also very interesting that areas that supported Cox in the past did not do so this time around.
Paul, my suggestion that Northfield plays with the timing of its presenting of its votes was based on a pre-event prediction that Northfield’s votes would appear about 15 minutes after the last of the non-Northfield groups were on-line. Although the observed sample size is 1, the prior was based on several past elections. When the prediction proved accurate (with respect to timing, +/- 5 minutes), the posterior probability on the belief that Northfield deliberately delays its report was increased (standard Bayesian analysis).
Brendon, normally your conclusion is exactly the one I would normally push (being the sort who likes to assume the best intentions of others are the explanation), but in this case the voting information was apparently available long before the Northfield results showed up. In the days of paper counts, your observation would have been easy to justify. But, before I get all conspiracy-theoried up, I should consider the possibility that Northfield is simply trying to ensure that other polling stations aren’t able to use the partial results to determine whether they need to gin up a few more votes. For my part, I don’t understand why the state web site, the media, or anyone else ought to be able to report partial results. Doing so (after the polls close) serves no newsworthy purpose and only makes it easier for someone to game of the system. One person’s reasonable decision (to hold results until everyone else is done) is another person’s conspiracy theory.
Thanks for the complement though, you are both right, I am usually more reserved in my comments, and I expect to be so again soon. I did have a personal stake in that I have had many good conversations with Ray about how to make the sorts of environmentally friendly planning commission moves that I feel are important for this area and that I see the cities (including Northfield) ignoring, and I will miss those conversations.
As usual, your analysis is well-informed. I simply thought your conclusions (comment #29) were rather personal and global given the evidence before you.
After all, the actual, final reporting of the results probably comes down to the decision or efficiency of one election official (my guess), and ascribing arrogance and dismissiveness to all of Northfield seemed like quite a reach for anyone, especially a statistician, to make.
I hope Ray stays involved in politics. His is a valuable voice. It would be good for you to start having some of conversation with Kevin Dahle, too.
And is it “ax” or “axe”? Such a short word, but I go back and forth on the spelling.
I think the short campaign season had a significant impact. IMHO, it was a change I liked & would like to see more often.
Also, I have been disgusted with all the campaign materials sent by/for Ray in the past. Too too much.
Also, I HATE Pawlenty! I went through a lawsuit where he was the opposing lawyer and an absolute BASTARD. I won, but will never forget or forgive his strategies and behaviors. He will lie, cheat, and steal to win. He is above nothing! His “coming to Northfield” to support
Ray sent me running to Kevin.
My girls, home for Christmas, had only good things to
say about Kevin—and that says much as they are none
too positive about Northfield HS.
Well put, Barbara! I’ve taken to calling Pawlenty the Green Chameleon Governor ( http://legalectric.org/weblog/2013/ ) and Ray tried to wear that mantel as well, using smooth words very different from his voting record. The voting records don’t lie.
I felt very, very guilty about forgetting to vote before going to work yesterday. Then, I realized that I couldn’t have voted if I had wanted to, as we moved to the Dakota county side of Northfield, and are out of the Senate District. But in my heart I still voted for Dahle.
The results of this election are significant. As others have pointed out, the college student vote would not have been needed to decide the election in favor of Kevin. He would have won without that.
Others have noted that the reason Ray lost was because of what is happening in Washington, but when Steve Sviggum’s seat came up for special election, that wasn’t so long ago, and it went Republican. I’m sure there are voters in Sviggum’s old district who are dissatisfied with Washington.
I don’t think this is just a matter of looking at stats, and assuming that a certain percent who voted for Jessica Peterson came out to vote for Kevin, while more who voted for Neuville decided to stay home.
Ray’s a nice guy, of course. Just before he announced that he’d run again against David Bly, I was playing at Nordic Jam at the Contented Cow, and Ray was kind enough to buy all the musicians a drink (beer, wine, lemonade). I appreciated and drank the beer, and because he had not yet announced, it was technically legal. But I wondered why a guy who was about to declare that he’d run again, and who had complained about his opponent serving pie at a public campaign function in a city park, would risk the appearance of impropriety and hypocrisy.
Both major parties have their established base. There are some who will always vote for Ray, others who will always vote for whoever the DFL puts forward. But too much attention and strategy emphasizes turning out the base, and not enough on those voters in the middle who might be on the fence.
Rob Hardy’s comment about the truck with the Cox signs across from the polling place, and other comments here about lawn signs prepared in advance, and Barbara’s comments in post 50, are all telling. Ray is a nice guy in person, and very willing to respond to E-mails, etc. But if the law says you can’t campaign a certain number of feet from a polling place, Northfielders get the sense that he’s the kind of candidate who would have a truck with signs one inch outside that boundary (or a foot inside it, if he doesn’t get caught).
It’s not just about discontent with Bush and Washington, and it’s not just about college students, or the base of one party or another. Northfield voters know Ray and see him operate more closely and intimately than people do in the other parts of the district, and I think the message that this sends is that Ray might have won this election if he had conducted himself differently in a variety of ways already mentioned, and also, if his voting record revealed him to be the moderate he claims to be.
Instead, Ray consistently blames it all on others: Liberal Northfield, college students, anti-Bush sentiment, so hard to be a fiscal conservative, etc.
Ray’s public face is green, conservation, help lower your taxes. But scratch the surface, and he is, in fact, less a listener and a public servant than he is about pro-business ideology, and he’s an aggressive campaigner to the point of alienating voters. And I think this will continue, and if he runs again, the margin by which he’ll lose will only widen.
Carol, where do you find out all that information regarding candidate contributions and spending? Is there a state web site you know of and could provide a quick link?
Regarding your post #24, I’ve been trying to dig around, because I do think homogeneity of the wards is important for the council members to represent their constituents consistently (try saying that one fast!). I disagree with Patrick’s post #31 a bit on this - everything I can find suggests that while precincts send delegates in the caucuses, wards ONLY determine local elections, and state house and senate and national house election districts combine multiple wards (anyone know if I’ve got it wrong??). However, for voting purposes, precincts must add to wards which must add to congressional districts, etc (as I understand it, anyway).
The requirement for contiguity likely arises from the need to combine precincts to get wards. However, the “communities of interest” requirement for precincts within wards looks to me like it’s intended to mean that a single person can represent the ward more accurately (exactly your comment). In looking at the voting map, there are numerous questionable calls but to my eye the most egregious by far are the two precincts that make up ward 4. I don’t understand how Jon can be expected to represent everyone’s various needs adequately. I would be particularly concerned if the number of people in the two precincts differed dramatically.
I had a geeky moment this evening, and I took a look at some data from the last census to get a better sense of differences across Northfield. Unfortunately, there really wasn’t enough information to see differences. At the level of “block groups” used to define regions for census data, Northfield looks reasonably similar with respect to age and gender, taking the college dip in median age into account. The rental population varies a bit, as expected, but doesn’t really get at the differences within the two precincts in ward 4. Dare I say the person who probably knows those differences best is Jon Denison?
I would be very interested in discussing districting at P&P. Maybe someone from the League of Women Voters could come explain some of the nitty gritty details?
Felicity - you ask and pose a number of questions re: voting district makeup.
The precinct is the building block of elections and vote management - counting votes, campaign planing and basic election organization.
WARDS only exist in cities and but made up of precincts - depending on population numbers. Voters go to their Precinct Polling place - and precincts report the outcome of the count. Wards have elected representatives
Planing the precincts is based principally on population - attempting to get near equality in numbers, but only within a city. Other precincts in Rice County but not in Northfield Faribault, etc, have their own numbers issues. As communities grow {or diminish in population] the numbers game will determine the representation. States are concerned that changing population, some might lose some US Representatives - i.e. voice in Congress.
As Patrick and Kiffi point out, other concerns in laying out the voting districts are: Continuity in societal ways, geographic contiguity…. avoid long slim connecting channels of geographic convenience to link populated areas, and Compactness, also a top desire — but other than numbers, these other concerns are often difficult to accomplish.
Northfield was redistricted following the 2000 census… this at the behest of the Charter Commission. The thought being as N’fld grows, there is a need for more Wards. That seemed logical - but when working on the redistricting, I decided the idea was flawed - more wards do not necessarily allow for community to be segmented with the best outcomes as envisioned by the guidelines. So it is we have the bizarre Ward 4 layout.
Why this is particularly problematic for Northfield (This is Kiffi’s view - which I largely agree with) is the nature of the two neighborhoods.
Upper 4 … precinct 1 (Greenvale south to Hwy 19 - LIncoln east to Hwy 3) is composed of older homes - mostly single family, part of what might be termed “old Northfield” . Precinct 2, W 4 lies south of Jefferson Parkway and east of Hwy 3 - and extends east to about 246. These are newer homes, suburban in many ways… and many apartments. The principle difference [might be] the life styles and values of the two neighborhoods.
To be frank… while this is not set in concrete, a major difference might be the attitude imbedded in the ‘98 / ‘99 struggle over Target. There are values differences in the two districts than might be more prevalent in Ward 4 than other wards - or so it seems.
Another problem [perceived ] is the St. Olaf Precinct. As the number worked out, there are approximately 2500 residents in the dorms [regardless of their voting patterns - hometown or Northfield] all 2500 count in the census numbers for that geographic area. Ward 3 P 1 is St. Olaf.
Ward 3 - P2 is everything else in W 3 except that part of W 3 which lies in Dakota County - There is no reasonable way to split St. Olaf in to two precincts. If added to 3-2, the numbers are too big - 3-3 [Dakota County] simply further confuses the lines.
Northfield including both colleges after the 2000 census had about 16,500 [now closer to 18,000] Each of the four wards then, if made up of equal numbers would be about 4000.
You can see the imbalance that St. Olaf’s population creates. Carleton College being smaller can include its student numbers in with the general population in Ward 1 P2 [I think] with more ease.
Sometimes in major cities - one building will constitute a precinct.
In Counties - a Township is one precinct - most Rice County Twpshps have far fewer residents than a precinct in Faribault or Northfield.
County voting venues are along districts made up for the most part of complete Townships having three of the five including parts of the two major cities - including some complete precincts - You may not split a precinct.
Rice County, at last census, had about 56,000 residents. The five districts were divided at about 11,000 per district, and weird lines around Northfield and Faribault had to be be drawn - these district lines had to maintain precinct lines.
Okeh! This is far too confusing - getting far too long - and yes… you may be right, a good discussion for P and P at the Cow. but with MAPS and numbers.
I want to end with this. My thought {I haven’t put this to a test] is that Northfield made a mistake when they split into four wards - because of the geographic limitations … The colleges, the rivers, the big park area and the obvious residential expansion sites: south east and north west [the latter in Dakota county]. I think a new plan might better go back to three Wards - [easier to divide sensibly] and have two Councilors for each ward elected in alternate biennium years. This is of course a crackpot theory - and one you and your young friends will have to sort out by the year 2010.
I am very impressed with both your and Patrick’s remarks on this . Shows some real investigative interest. Good!
Victor is truly informed on that issue, having worked ( along with the various math people) on the LWV committee that, unfortunately, ended with a lawsuit against Rice County in order to get it redistricted more fairly.
I am on the LWV board and we have had NF’s need for redistricting on several recent agendas, but it’s hard to get through an agenda when there’s so many “irregularities” going on in the city process, and large discussions ensue over those gov’t processes. Practically, since we are at 2008, redistricting would not likely happen until 2010-11, when all census numbers are in.
The “communities of interest” requirement really bothers me, and I have posited that it might be better to have ALL at-large councilors rather than Ward representatives; that way they are all, hopefully, committed to the same goals of what is best for the common good, and the city.
Interesting! I have to say, looking at the map, I really like Victor’s solution of 3 wards each with two councilors. I see them as one ward on the west side of the river, and two wards on the east side probably split at Woodley. Unfortunately, that would require changing a couple of existing precincts, which might make it more difficult to achieve.
Kiffi, I think it’s important that the councilors represent a specific geographic area, because there are definitely competing interests going on. Election from a ward should guarantee that the councilor puts more weight on the needs of that group. That’s particularly important given the expansion Victor mentioned.
I’m very glad LWV is considering the districting question. I think waiting for the 2010 census to come out to have a general plan in place would be a mistake, because there are so many local variables to consider. If a general plan is ready to go, then it can be tweaked following the census results.
If there is anything to learn from this election, it would be that lawn signs don’t really show the position of the people. Seeing the volunteers in the campaign office every day told me that something good was going on.
When people would ask me for lawn signs, I would tell them that we were “out” of lawn signs because we hardly had any in the first place. We poured all of our resources into directly contacting voters. This reply would inevitably be followed by an incredulous look to which I would respond, “lawn signs can’t vote, so don’t worry about who has the most lawn signs. Everything will be fine if we just keep telling people about Kevin.”
In the end, the election came down to three very basic ideas; (a) a great candidate (thanks Kevin!); (b) a well articulated message that, “people matter and we need to make decisions at the state legislature that reflect the impact on people’s lives”; and (c) HARD WORK! Every person that supported Kevin made calls, talked to others, knocked on doors and told their friends, “Kevin Dahle is not just a good person, he will work for you and your family in St. Paul”. This is grassroots politics at it’s finest. Thanks to every person who helped to make this happen.
Felicity: Yes, I agree that Victor’s solution of three wards, each with two reps elected in alternate elections IS the better solution, but what I haven’t had time to work out is how the local reaction to the college vote ( Which is usually a negative reaction to the college vote) would impact the three ward solution and then how to create an argument that would make locals quit feeling that college students shouldn’t vote here.
I personally am totally in favor of the college students voting here if they choose to. I think the argument that says”they’re going to be here four years, or less, and then go; why should they impact our local politics” is a very specious argument. I believe most college students are not certain to go back to where they grew up for the rest of their adult lives; furthermore, how can any civic minded person conscientously discourage a new voter from participation? Aren’t we always trying to get higher voting %ages?
Anyway, I think its a really interesting subject, and I know who I’ll be calling when the planning time comes around.
p.s. you’re also right about getting plan in place , so it’s ready for final “tweaking” after the census.
Holly and Carol:
Thanks, both of you, for the links.
Ray Coudret:
Thanks for your insights.
Griff:
Did you ever figure out the 8P.M. time on the article in the News? I assumed that Ariel started writing/posting her article around the time that most of the other precints had reported, but perhaps waited with a window open for a post of her story to the News, and waited, and waited, till Northfield’s precincts were in. But maybe she had some contacts that gave her a scoop before they were posted to the Secretary of State’s website.
In general:
I wonder if some of this had to do, not just with discontent with Washington, but with discontent with trickle-down. Whenever I hear Ray (and heard Tom) talk about business and taxes, it always seemed they were trickle-down to the core: give businesses what they need to thrive, and then everyone will prosper, just trust us, etc. But look at all the fraud and profiteering related to the war in Iraq. Maybe people are more decided about (and against) trickle-down, and maybe that played a part–besides Kevin’s good networking as a good teacher, and the other factors already mentioned.
Paul, my guess is that the default time is the time the story file is opened. You can store it and open it again and unless you deliberately change it when you finish, it posts with the original time. That’s how it has worked at other sites I know.
I was checking out both the NFN’s site and the Sec of State’s site on election night. The News didn’t call the election at 8 pm. Their story was updated several times in conjunction with the results from the Sec of State.
FYI - When you want to check out what has been posted previously, what’s changed and when, just go to the site and click on “Wayback Machine.” If you don’t have this on your toolbar, well, go here, and scroll down a bit to the part where it says “click here and move to toolbar” and it will attach and give you many hours of pleasurable sleuthing! http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
If you need a reason for the large margin in the recent vote count, look to the two colleges. The results hardly reflect a representative democracy. This coming spring the students will leave our city, while the residents of this city and the rest of the state will have to live with the outcome of the past election. I would submit the students who are not residents are mostly clueless about the needs of Northfield and our state. They are allowed to vote on issues which they will not suffer the outcome. The students are nothing more than imported voters. Hardly representative.
As has been posted previously, even if you subtracted out every vote cast by the students at the two colleges in town, Keven Dahle would still have been elected our new state senator.
That being said, our Constitution clearly affords every adult citizen of the United States the right to vote.
Robert Hall - please review the election results on the Secretary of State website. I don’t get why you and others persist in this “it’s the students” argument. It’s against evidence — it’s not true. Ray Cox didn’t take a single precinct in Northfield, and those are the voters who know him best. Ray Cox lost in townships that had been prior strongholds. And you’re also forgetting all of Ray’s student vote in 2002 and in 2004! If you subtracted student vote from the 2006 mix, Ray would have had even fewer votes than he did. Enough of the false excuses about why Ray Cox lost … sigh… The election is over.
Even if you subtracted every vote for Kevin Dahle, and kept Ray’s votes, from the two “college” precincts (the Carleton precinct, at least, has many non-students in it as well, which is why I put college in quotes), Dahle still would have won.
Yes, the students contributed to the “large margin”, but Dahle only needed to win by one vote. Size of margin doesn’t alter the outcome.
I have commented extensively on this issue on Northfield.org. Not wanting to rehash the discussion or make this response extremely long, here’s a link to just one of several comments I made in defense of college student voting:
You can scroll through several other comments made by me and other folks there.
I will say here, however, in my experience with Carleton students - I am an alum and a current employee - I have found them to be very well-informed as voters - at least as well-informed as many non-students who vote. I’m sure the same can be said of Olaf students.
Regardless, being “clueless” (as you stated) does not preclude one from voting, unless you would argue for literacy tests again, as adopted by Southern states in response to the 15th Amendment.
Although states determine voting rights, they must follow the strictures of several Constitutional amendments and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
It’s not a matter of who won or lost. Campus students are imported votes. They do not represent nor do they suffer the consequences of their vote. The residents and taxpayers foot the bill. The state of Minnesota may allow them to vote as residents to be sure, however they are not held responsible for their vote either informed or uninformed. At the end of the school year the students take a powder and head for their real home. Our college age childeren voted by absentee ballot. We thought it correct for them not be involved in community politics where they are not held responsible for their vote.
Bob
Good points, Bob. I would argue that people who live in an area 9 months out of the year, and attend school in that area, are very much effected by a vote.
College students have a voice, and as long as they don’t vote in two places (whether it be in two cities or two states), they should be considered regular, ordinary constituents.
Placing limitations on voters is a sneaky, demeaning, nasty activity that has been done many times in our history. Let’s say “NO” to any idea such a poll tax, a literacy test, a required absentee ballot, and etc.
Let’s also count every eligible voter as a whole person, and let’s not discriminate based on color of skin or for any other adjective.
C’mon, where were you when the vote was close and Ray Cox won? I didn’t hear your argument about the college vote, then.
I recently had a long conversation with two Carleton students about the recent election and the new rental ordinance. I think that learning to live in a community with other adults is, or should be, an important part of a college student’s education. They should learn to be responsible neighbors and responsible citizens of the community in which they are living for four years. Both St. Olaf and Carleton have “civic engagement” programs to address, as the Carleton website puts it, the feeling of “estrangement from the world at large” that often results from living in the “bubble” of college. As “townies,” we shouldn’t make that feeling of estrangement worse by resenting the efforts of students to become engaged in our community. We should encourage more engagement, and help students to be better neighbors and to feel more invested in Northfield. We can be a part of their education, and we can all reap the benefits of creating better citizens.
My 18-year-old daughter returned to her college home, Grinnell, Iowa on January 3rd to participate in the Iowa caucuses because she had become passionately interested in the presidential campaign and wanted to caucus for her chosen candidate, Barak Obama. She will likely vote there in the fall as well.
She could have voted here in Northfield (and would have voted for Kevin Dahle) before heading down to Iowa to caucus, and it may have even been legal for her to do so. However, after she and I consulted with the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office and the Iowa Democratic party, we agreed that it would be unethical (although probably legal) to do both, and she did NOT vote here for Dahle. I fully supported her decision to caucus in Iowa, and am thrilled that she has become politically engaged as a college student.
College students should be encouraged in every possible way to participate in the political process in whatever way they choose.
I don’t hear anyone complaining about folks who move to Northfield for a year or two (let’s say as a corporate transfer, commuting to Eden Prairie to work), vote for a Republican or Democratic candidate in a local election, but then move on to wherever their job takes them next. Many St. Olaf and Carleton students have more of a local stake than such a voter; all have a valid right to vote nonetheless.
I don’t believe two students are representive of nearly four thousand students. How are students who live on the campus of a non profit institution that pays no local or state taxes, does not provide funding for our streets, street repair or parks but is entitled to their use affected by my vote as a taxpayer and property owner?
Bob
Well, they are effected by the vote in general. It’s collaborative. Also, those St. O and C students drive on the roads, buy things, and live and work right here with us 9 months out of the year.
They may not pay property tax, but if they work around here, they pay tax. If they buy things, they pay tax.
As to the “private college” aspect– why don’t St. Olaf and Carleton pay property tax? In light of the recent daycare property tax ruling that I heard about, I believe Carleton and St. Olaf should have to pay property tax. I know, they donate… but… explain it to me.
I would much rather have constructive conversations with students, and encourage them to think of themselves as neighbors and citizens who have a stake in this community, than find reasons to resent them. I’ve known quite a few Carleton students. I think they tend to vote Democratic not because they want to spend someone else’s tax dollars, but because they can imagine other people’s lives: the plight of the poor, the plight of those who face prejudice and discrimination, the plight of those without adequate health care, the plight of those who have to try to learn and teach in underfunded schools. They vote with their imaginations, not their tax dollars. I’m okay with that. I’m a local taxpayer, but I think politics should be more about imagination and less about taxes.
First, Mr. Hall, I would be very surprised if “nearly four thousand students” are registered from the two campuses. That’s almost certainly a sizable overstatement. Many never register or vote here.
Second, since I’m assuming you didn’t read through the comments I referenced before, I’ll just cut and paste here. This was a response to an anonymous commenter on Northfield.org who was making much the same argument you are making here:
“What other tests should we place on voters? Do we demand proof at the polling place that the issue they are voting on will effect them in some way?
Regarding the tax issue you raise in particular, what about students who are renting? What about students whose parents own or rent in town? What about nursing home residents? Should they be denied the right to vote if they wish to vote?
While voting is never going to be perfect, we have state and federal laws that protect the right because we are a society… we are together.
This carping on college student voting, which was also a big issue during the Target debate in town, is, at best, partisan and self-interested, and, at worst, a dangerous step toward disenfranchising larger and larger groups of voters based on an ever-growing, impossibly byzantine web of disqualifying factors.
Additionally, the strain on the civic process of voting - monitoring those who can and cannot vote on particular questions - would be nearly impossible to control and horrendously expensive to enact. Costs that would be passed on to taxpayers.
Then there are those state and federal laws to change or circumvent.
The system is not perfect; nor can it be, but it’s endlessly better than the system that would result if we followed your argument much further.”
they also provide plenty of income taxes and the students also pay sales taxes. Probably more than they would in their home cities. 3/4 of their time is here, they should be legally allowed to vote here unless you want to take away their rights.
As a College student in Madison WI, I always voted in Madison. It was my new home. I visited my parents home on holidays, but I lived, worked and spent my income in Madison. I have not been back to my home city since I graduated from high school other than visits. I would have felt silly voting there for people I did not know and issues that did not affect me.
I would hope a voting college student would vote on reality and not their imagination. We already have enough people voting with their imaginations. We just sent another one to St. Paul. The colleges give the city money, but at their discression and not by any state statute formula. I never said that college students didn’t have the right to vote, but vote where they are a ligitimate resident and are held accountable for their voting choices. How many students do you believe have valid Mn. drivers license? If you are a resident of this state you can not drive on an out of state drivers license. College students are not an intergal part of this city. They live on the paramiter.
132 Comments
Wow. I thought Cox was a shoo-in. What explains the fairly large margin of victory for Dahle?
I was surprised, too, Bill — I expected Cox to win, though by a modest margin.
My impression was that he was shooting further right with his campaign than he has with his House campaigns; at least that’s what I’ve gotten from the mailings I’ve received and the some of his comments during the Locally Grown debate. Maybe the district — Northfield especially — was simply not interested in some of those positions.
I could be wrong there, but I honestly don’t know what else it could be. He’s well-liked and has better name recognition than Kevin Dahle.
But now, to put a smile on. It’s been a while since a candidate I supported won.
Yea, Kevin! What resounding support for what you stand for now and what you’ve always represented as an educator, friend, and concerned citizen. I look forward, as does all of our family, to your voice in our State government. Best to you, Beth, and your family as you begin this new journey.
My friends and I were just talking about that; we suggested that perhaps it was that very mentality that Cox was a shoo-in that created apathy among the conservative vote and gave the vote to the DFL. Who knows: this whole scenario seemed really unlikely with the large margin of victory for Kevin.
ohmygod! It’s been SO long since a candidate I’ve voted for won!!!! Way to go, Senator Dahle! This makes may day, my week, my month, my year!!!
I s’pose there won’t be a recount.
They’re kind of exciting, you know. And they give Northfield some good, non-controversial publicity (which is better than the controversial kind: teen drug-use stats, city hall, etc.).
Mabye we can shoot for a closer one next time?
Strib: DFLer Dahle wins state Senate seat
I took the photo on the left of Kevin Dahle at about 8:30 PM at Froggy Bottoms, and on the right of Ray Cox and Tom Neuville at about 8:45 PM at Ray’s house:
Gabriel wrote,
“…this whole scenario seemed really unlikely with the large margin of victory for Kevin.”
Judging by lawn-signs alone, you’d have thought Ray was going to have a slam-dunk.
Republican conspiracy-theorists may wonder:
Did some DFL-leaning election judges see to it that all the most disfunctional ballot-counting machines were placed in the Republican-leaning precincts?
Just like the Republicans did in Ohio?
Maybe the ‘publicans should contest this, call for a recount and investigation?
Congrats once again to Kevin!! He does an amazing job at the HS and will do an amazing job in St. Paul. I think Gabe hit the nail on the head when he mentioned apathy among the Republican voters. I also believe that Cox’s platform stressing his experience was one that did not satisfy voters as many are upset over the past years. Yes he has experience, but look what has happened while he was in office. The nail in the coffin had to be Pawlenty coming down to show his support-thanks Tim!
Nfld News: Dahle wins election with Northfield landslide.
Hmmm. That article’s timestamp shows 8:02 pm. How did Ariel Emery know that soon?!!
It is a FINE morning. Congratulations Mr. Dahle.
Now that the DFL has a 2/3 majority in the senate, lets get some things done!
I think folks just got tired of Cox’s “in your face” / arrogant/vote for me or else campaigning. He touted himself as a “green candidate” but filled our mailboxes with 2 or 3 glossy ads PER DAY! Dahle is in - WATCH YOUR WALLET! I’m sure that the proposed .10 per gallon gas tax just got another vote not to mention numerous other new taxes/entitlement spending. Hopefully, the I-R’s will come up with a better candidate the next time(s) around so that Bly and Dahle can return to their teaching duties.
Congratulations to Kevin Dahle, and best wishes for a very successful term as state senator!
I really liked what he had to say at the candidate debate, and I was proud to vote for him, but I have to admit that all the Pro-Cox talk (from Democrats!) here, and all those lawn signs, made me feel that I was only making a symbolic gesture with my vote.
Northfield continues to be a very surprising town.
What wonderful news! I expected the rest of the district to overwhelm any Democratic Northfield bump. Any maps available of voting results? And when was the last time this seat was held by a Democrat?
Loads of Carleton students voting on the first day of classes, walking right past the large red pick-up with plastered with Ray Cox signs parked all day practically across the street from the polling place.
I think there are several reasons for the DFL win.
I think Democrats in general are more excited, more angry at Bush and more united in defeating Republicans in any race. Having the election on Iowa caucus night, when wall-to-wall media coverage of a record-breaking number of Democrats turned out, certainly gave DFL-ers a shot of adrenaline and a reminder to vote.
I think Pawlenty’s timing of the special election seemed such a blatant political move that many people were insulted and enraged. Ray having his campaign materials ready when the announcement was made fueled the feeling of a conspiracy, and God knows people here love to feel they’re fighting evil conspiracies. And my guess is that already eager college voters took it as a personal challenge.
I think many people weren’t voting against Cox, but were determined to control Pawlenty by giving taking away the Republican super-majority.
I think Ray as an individual is a wonderful guy, but there was a sense of Pawlenty trying to shove him down everyone’s throats.
I’m sure Ray never will live down the construction work he did at the newspaper just before an earlier election. It may have meant nothing, but the timing of the job added to the feeling Ray was being forced on the public by an organized power structure.
Congratulations to Kevin Dahle, and best wishes for a wise and successful term as state senator!
Northfield continues to be a very surprising place.
Interesting. A review of the precinct by precinct voting shows that it wasn’t just students who put Dahle over the top. Dahle won by large margins in every precinct in Northfield, as well as taking Dundas and Bridgewater.
I was watching the Sec of State’s website last night and as of 10:15 all of the precincts except for Northfield’s had reported in. (BTW, what’s up with that?) Cox was ahead by several hundred votes. Northfield’s votes made the difference, obviously.
Over Christmas break, I talked with several Northfield High School grads, now in college, and a couple of current NHS students. They unanimously agreed that Dahle is a great teacher, and a great guy. My son, Nick, thinks that probably half of NHS grads have had Dahle for a teacher. That translates to a lot of face-to-face parent/teacher conferences.
I speculate that years of great work in the classroom translated into votes for Mr. Dahle. Ultimately, that work trumped door knocking/lawns signs/mailings, etc.
Well said, Anne! I believe there is an anti-Republican sentiment nationwide because of Bush.
The many, annoying phone calls from the Republican party urging people to vote in this election I do not believe helped their cause either. No one likes to feel pressured or manipulated.
I also believe that many in Northfield have experienced the negative effects of school budget cuts. Though Dahle is only one voice (though now aligned with a Democratic majority in the state senate), voters could be sure he will make our schools a priority.
It was not only college students voting for Dahle.
I think a big part of Kevin’s votes were from the 18-19 year old high schoolers, and college age students hanging around Northfield still, whom all had him as a teacher at the nhs. I never went to the hs, so I only know him from drivers ed. In which I learned more about the Andy Griffith show than driving laws…. Is he still the president of that club, does anyone know?
Hey Triumvirate - the next election is suddenly coming up very quickly. I’m certainly interested in hearing what my fellow citizens think. It’s not a strictly Northfield issue, but it will certainly affect Northfielders. What about a board for that one?
The Nf stats were amazing. They also showed one of the problems NF faces which is the needed redistricting of the wards/precincts.
It is very difficult to construct the wards so that they fulfill the legal requirements for their “equality”; the three considerations are: equal numbers of residents/voters, contiguity, and “communities of interest”.
When NF was last redistricted there was extreme gerrymandering of the 4th Ward. At a council work session, it was stated that by constructing the boundaries as they exist today, two seated councilpersons would be able to retain their seats. (No “conspiracy; just a council vote)
The result is that the 2 precincts of ward 4 are fairly equal in numbers, BUT have NO contiguity (witness the line running down highway 3 with not a single residence along it) and if you look at the voting patterns, they do not seem to be “communities of interest”.
That said, I think the “communities of interest” requirement is one that is very problematic; it could be interpreted as being a very possibly prejudicial assumption in the determination of that evaluation. (Sorry, didn’t say that well, but I think you get the point). But looking at the votes from precinct 1 of ward 4, compared to those of precinct 2 , you can see a
huge difference in the voting preferences. Does that show…. ? Well, what does that show?
Statisticians, please weigh in here.. Bruce, are you out there? Am I remembering correctly that you, Felicity, are a statistician?
I think this is a fascinating question , and has real ramifications for the 4th Ward ever electing a candidate which represents both precincts satisfactorily
Kevin won because he is a great educator, articulate, kind and well respected. If you saw the debate it was obvious that Kevin was well schooled on the issues.
Didn’t Cox lose against Bly, in the most recent election cycle? In that race he had alot of signs and letters to the editor as well. But as Edwards said last night– the people decide, it doesn’t matter how much people spend or out spend. The people decide! Plus, from my perspective, these Republicans who try to say they are “moderate” and then vote with the party almost always, aren’t sneaking through. (Watch Coleman try to act like he is a moderate..)
We the people!
Wellstone would be proud! Finally, grass roots politics seems to be taking hold. Sitting in Prof. Wellstones “Grass roots organizing” class in 1985 I thought much of it was a dream or thoughts of dreamers. But the internet really seems to be bringing many of those ideas and strategies to fruition.
Congratulations Kevin!
MPR: DFLer Dahle wins special legislative election.
Did student votes in Northfield determine the election?
Not likely, in my opinion.
A back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that in the Northfield wards with significant campus overlap (W1P1, W1P2, W3P1, W4P1) the total vote went about 400 for Ray and 1475 for Kevin. That’s a big margin — but not even close to the 1600-vote margin for the total election. These wards also include many, many non-student voters.
So, almost certainly, the result would have been the same even if *no* student had voted.
My best guess is that the election result occurred not because of nasty bloggers, questionable endorsements, push-polling, glossy ads, or other campaigning peculiarities. Seems to me we had two good, credible, well-liked, and locally well-known candidates. But they have different party affiliations, and in present political circumstances and in this district, Republicans have to swim against the current.
kiffi-
ward 4 precinct 1; 75% Dahle
ward 4 precinct 2: 65% Dahle
That doesn’t seem like a huge difference in voter preference.
Seems like all the ’suburban’ areas of Northfield went for Dahle at strong levels. And he carried the liberal bastions of Shieldsville, Northfield township, Erin township, Bridgewater township, Dundas and tied in Wheeling township. Something going on here that’s for sure.
Now THIS is how an election should look in this district. It’s consistent with the index, and as the prior commentor noticed: “My best guess is that the election result occurred not because of nasty bloggers, questionable endorsements, push-polling, glossy ads, or other campaigning peculiarities.” I’d say it had a lot to do with the ABSENCE of these things (except for all of Ray’s glossy ads, and it’ll be interesting to see how much personal money he put into his campaign because in a prior House campaign, he’d loaned his campaign over $8k, which is $3k over the House limit, and wasn’t called on it). There wasn’t the Republican push-polling this time, there were no Sviggum-directed dirty press conferences in the dump and no baseless threats of felony prosecution for serving pie, instead it was a CAMPAIGN. Dahle had to make a name for himself and get the word out about his and his party’s positions, Ray had the disadvantage of having a prior voting record that spoke volumes about how he’d perform. This is a satisfying result. Now the big question is whether the DFL will act, or whether they’ll cave as they have in Washington. Given the House last session, and given the lack of leadership and the participation of the DFL in wrongheaded policy, hand in hand with our chameleon-”green” governor, particularly on energy issues, I’m not too hopeful, but will be there prodding anyway. It’s a world where DFL House Energy Chair called me in to tell me “we need more coal” and where Sen. Ellen Anderson champions Energy Omnious bill after Energy Omnious bill that facilitates transmission lines and more coal, oh, and maybe a little wind. It’s going to take a big consistent push to turn this battleship around. Maybe this is a sign???
Paul’s right. The much worried about student vote was only incidental to the margin. It is interesting that only 41 of ~300 votes at Carleton were for Ray, which in my mind is indicative of the fact that Northfield is sooooo out of touch with the rural voters (the margin was reasonably close without the Northfield vote). I’ve long been claiming that Bridgewater’s undertaking of planning and zoning represented a long simmering frustration with a remote urban-oriented county’s poor managing of the rural needs, now it looks like I can add Northfield to that list of remote and disconnected entities (don’t even get me started on how remote and disconnected the state and federal arms are). Oh well.
Curt asked why Northfield was the last set of precincts to report in. At the Cox residence we knew the results in the Northfield area long before they were posted. Apparently Northfield does not want anyone to forget that Northfield rules this part of the country, and we rural types ought to be more attentive to our place, that is, we better just sit down and shut up. By waiting until all other results were in, then almost casually, but certainly arrogantly, showing up with their votes and essentially saying to the rest of us “oh, why did you even bother, you little peasants”, the city continues its tradition. (Cautionary caveat, I’ve just read Mari Sandoz’s “Life of Crazy Horse” and I totally empathize with his struggle to protect a way of life that simply was not important to the hordes from the east.)
Kiffi,
I’m not a statistician, but yes, I am married to one.
District gerrymandering is a fine tradition dating back nearly to the beginning of modern democracy.
One common goal for the group in control of the gerrymander is to build districts in which your side can expect to win lots of districts with 52% or so of the votes, while concentrating as many of your opponents’ voters as possible into districts where they will win a smaller number of seats, but will win each of those seats by (ideally) margins of 90% to 10%.
Unfortunately, concentrating groups of voters is sometimes cynically defended as creating “communities of interest.”
Redistricting is an incredibly complex area both of politics and of statistical science. There’s a whole branch of statistics devoted to understanding geographic data (like voter rolls) that can and undoubtedly is used to draw districting maps. There is also a large body of law on the matter of districting that says what can and can’t be done. But all of that is well outside my areas of expertise.
However, it’s very hard to know what’s the right way to draw districts. No matter how you draw then, some interests will have their influence increased, and others will have their influence diminished. My personal first instinct would be to turn it over to a computer with simple arbitrary rules, and let the chips fall where they may. I would think the rules for such a plan would favor geographic contiguity and compactness and little else. However, such districts would potentially shift radically with each census, as populations move and neighborhoods are built. Also, what does “compact” mean? Do you want to consider geographic obstacles like rivers, or man-made ones, like highways, when considering where to divide districts? “The other side of the tracks” may well separate “communities of interest” from each other.
My point is, redistricting is one of the most important, and least well-delineated, processes in our democracy. Thus far, the principle in this country has been based on letting the majority rule. If one party takes it too far one way, at some later date, it is hoped that the other party will get a chance to rewrite it.
The 2000 census redistricting is a case in point. The Republicans controlled that process in a majority of states, and they carefully constructed a minimum number of “very safe” Democratic districts, and a maximum number of Republican “pretty safe” seats. It was great for 2004, and it was part of the foundation of the promised “permanent Republican majority” that we heard a lot about just a few years ago. Unfortunately for them, a small-but-generalized shift away from the Republican party in the last few years turned a lot of those “pretty safe” Republican seats into a large number of “up for grabs” or even Democratic-leaning districts. And thus, the Republicans lost a lot of House seats in 2006, and are widely expected to lose even more in 2008.
The art and science of drawing district lines would be a great topic for Politics and a Pint, if anyone’s up to the task. I, for one, have no idea what the right answer is.
Bruce,
Were you serious (in posting #29) about attributing the relatively late appearance of Northfield voting results to arrogance, elitism, dissing the “peasants”, etc.?
Perhaps such “city” attitudes exist (as do, presumably, “country” attitudes about godless, libertine liberals here in Rice County’s Gomorrah), but I need a little more evidence than the order of posting of election results. Could it instead have something to do with the larger voting numbers in Northfield precincts? Or a malice-less glitch of some type?
William of Ockham (the 14th century Razor guy, but not a slasher) must be turning in his grave.
Yes, Paul and Bruce are right above, the students weren’t a big part of this win, though of course like every voter, they contributed to itl Special elections are atypical, and only those who feel strongly about the single race at issue will turn out.
I’ve just run through the results, by County and by Pct., and what stands out is Ray lost every precinct in Northfield, even those that were traditionally “Ray’s” in past races, that applies to Northfield, but also take a look at the townships in 25B, Shieldsville, Wheeling and Bridgewater. Bridgewater was a Ray stronghold, and he lost big-time. He didn’t do at all well in 25B, which points to dissatisfaction, probably from varying perspectives, in his performance as Representative. Norgaard’s votes could have made a difference if they all would have been Ray voters, but as Ralph Nader notes, third parties take from both R’s and D’s. And it’s good Norgaard was in the mix, though he probably didn’t have the resources to mount a fast and furious campaign. The third voice brings in issues and perspectives that aren’t usually present, keeps everyone on their toes, and perhaps a little more honest.
Seems a pretty good campaign and election all the way around. The campaign finance reports, when they appear, will make it even more interesting.
The conspiracy theory types who believe that the election was timed to minimize student votes might want to consider another element: Maybe the black helicopter boys “out geniused” themselves on this one. There were a lot of college students still home on break on election day. These were local kids, personally educated by Dahle. A lot of colleges don’t start up again for a couple of weeks. Were they a factor???
Just a whimsical remark of course…..
Along the whimisical remarks line, Carol, you’ll appreciate this one. Several months ago I googled “Occam’s razor” and the Google context-specific ads came up with this.
I keep in on my desktop and call it “Occam’s Norelco.” (Click the photo for an actual definition for “Occam’s Razor”)
Curt - That ’s a point, not just whimsical! I’d guess that it is a factor here, particularly the legions of Northfield parents who have dealt with Dahle as he dealt with their kids, the votes reflecting their impression of his character and values!
I concur with many of the comments about Pawlenty’s support for Cox. This was a calculated election by the Republicans thinking Cox was a slam-dunk in this district hence nominating Neville for the judgeship. It certainly backfired on them. But let’s give Northfielders credit for seeing thru this smokescreen and recognizing that Pawlenty only wanted Cox in the Senate to thwart any attempt of a veto. Cox championed himself as a bi-partisan, independent representative but everyone recognized he was solidly in Pawlenty’s back pocket. The correct and “only” choice was Kevin Dahle, and he will represent us well. Congrats!
Thank you, Patrick , for a lot of in-depth thoughts about the creation of voting districts; it IS a fascinating subject, to my mind… and I know it was to the mathematicians that helped the League of Women Voters with the redistricting of Rice County court case, a few years ago.
I’d like to hear more of your thoughts on the “communities of interest” issue; I consider that very problematic, and would be interested to know a historic perspective of how that qualification originated.
You’re oh , so right, about this being a good subject for Norm’s Politics and a Pint…. why don’t you propose it to him, and offer to lead the discussion?
I think you are right, Paul Z., the election was won by Dahle and his volunteers, and not by bloggers, etc.
I think today’s political issues are driving the dem vote.
Carol, this election showed that Cox lost the last election, too, and that Dems are even more determined.
Also, along the lines of the landslide: Northfielders vote, and rural people most likely didn’t have a personal connection with any of the candidates, and this was a SpecElect. Traditionally, only certain people vote.
I noticed that Ward 2-2 voted heavily Dem. That is true with tradition, and good to see. My parent’s lived in 2-2 and it heavy Dem, and then it was Rep. for a while. Last House election it went Dem, if I am not mistaken. SO, it says something about the new builds out past Jefferson.
Bruce,
Yikes. Is that your ax grinding, or are you just unhappy to see this result?
Isn’t it safer to assume that Northfield’s results were last to report because of the much higher vote count? Opposed to, say, Dennison, where 4 votes were cast? This might be especially true if city election officials decided to submit results as a group - one time, rather than individually by precinct. I don’t know if that’s their process, but it seems to me to be one way they might operate.
I think your characterization of Northfield as “arrogantly” telling rural voters to “sit down and shut up” denigrates all voters and election officials of Northfield, and reflects only your bias, not reality. You’re usually so much more reasonable and thoughtful than that.
As for Northfield being “sooooo out of touch with the rural voters”, isn’t that also accurately expressed as rural voters being sooooo out of touch with Northfield? Or does your ax only cut one way?
Wm. S. post # 27… I’ll have to go back and look at the precinct tallies; maybe I remembered them incorrectly as it was early this AM, after a late night , and I hadn’t even finished my FIRST cup of tea….
I was recalling about a 50% point spread , Dahle over Cox in Ward 4 pct. 1; and about a 30+ % point spread in Ward 4 pct. 2……. that seemed a significant difference …. Maybe I was wrong?
I have to admit that my son’s comments about Kevin Dahle influenced my voting decision. He said that Mr. Dahle was one of the best teachers in the school, not because he was “easy,” but because he “made you learn.”
At conferences I sometimes questioned his dry sense of humor, but I also knew he was dedicated to teaching and doing his job well. He was not there to impress the parents but to teach the kids.
In that way, I have faith that Dahle will have the same dedication to his job as senator. Yes, his character and values were an important part of my decision as they are for all I choose to vote for.
I am a little miffed at the name calling that has gone on in the blogs on this site. I hear that votes for Dahle were from either citizens who have no investment in this community (ie. St. Olaf and Carleton students and students home from college) or are out of touch with the “rural types.” I have to say that I do not fall into either of those categories, and neither do I consider myself a liberal.
Frankly, it is actually interesting to me that many of the rural communities voted Republican being the Democratic party is traditionally known as the farm labor party. It is also very interesting that areas that supported Cox in the past did not do so this time around.
Now, if Dems could just get 2/3rds in the House, too. Veto override!
Paul, my suggestion that Northfield plays with the timing of its presenting of its votes was based on a pre-event prediction that Northfield’s votes would appear about 15 minutes after the last of the non-Northfield groups were on-line. Although the observed sample size is 1, the prior was based on several past elections. When the prediction proved accurate (with respect to timing, +/- 5 minutes), the posterior probability on the belief that Northfield deliberately delays its report was increased (standard Bayesian analysis).
Brendon, normally your conclusion is exactly the one I would normally push (being the sort who likes to assume the best intentions of others are the explanation), but in this case the voting information was apparently available long before the Northfield results showed up. In the days of paper counts, your observation would have been easy to justify. But, before I get all conspiracy-theoried up, I should consider the possibility that Northfield is simply trying to ensure that other polling stations aren’t able to use the partial results to determine whether they need to gin up a few more votes. For my part, I don’t understand why the state web site, the media, or anyone else ought to be able to report partial results. Doing so (after the polls close) serves no newsworthy purpose and only makes it easier for someone to game of the system. One person’s reasonable decision (to hold results until everyone else is done) is another person’s conspiracy theory.
Thanks for the complement though, you are both right, I am usually more reserved in my comments, and I expect to be so again soon. I did have a personal stake in that I have had many good conversations with Ray about how to make the sorts of environmentally friendly planning commission moves that I feel are important for this area and that I see the cities (including Northfield) ignoring, and I will miss those conversations.
axe (well ground)
Sorry, [bury]that axe[/bury]
Bruce,
As usual, your analysis is well-informed. I simply thought your conclusions (comment #29) were rather personal and global given the evidence before you.
After all, the actual, final reporting of the results probably comes down to the decision or efficiency of one election official (my guess), and ascribing arrogance and dismissiveness to all of Northfield seemed like quite a reach for anyone, especially a statistician, to make.
I hope Ray stays involved in politics. His is a valuable voice. It would be good for you to start having some of conversation with Kevin Dahle, too.
And is it “ax” or “axe”? Such a short word, but I go back and forth on the spelling.
All my best,
Brendon
Oops, that should be “your conversations” in my post #46…
Yes, good idea, Brenden. It’s always good to talk with your Representative or Senator.
I think the short campaign season had a significant impact. IMHO, it was a change I liked & would like to see more often.
Also, I have been disgusted with all the campaign materials sent by/for Ray in the past. Too too much.
Also, I HATE Pawlenty! I went through a lawsuit where he was the opposing lawyer and an absolute BASTARD. I won, but will never forget or forgive his strategies and behaviors. He will lie, cheat, and steal to win. He is above nothing! His “coming to Northfield” to support
Ray sent me running to Kevin.
My girls, home for Christmas, had only good things to
say about Kevin—and that says much as they are none
too positive about Northfield HS.
Congratulations Kevin!
Well put, Barbara! I’ve taken to calling Pawlenty the Green Chameleon Governor ( http://legalectric.org/weblog/2013/ ) and Ray tried to wear that mantel as well, using smooth words very different from his voting record. The voting records don’t lie.
I felt very, very guilty about forgetting to vote before going to work yesterday. Then, I realized that I couldn’t have voted if I had wanted to, as we moved to the Dakota county side of Northfield, and are out of the Senate District. But in my heart I still voted for Dahle.
I’ve put together a map of the election results, which you can see here: http://ottergoose.net/blog/655
The results of this election are significant. As others have pointed out, the college student vote would not have been needed to decide the election in favor of Kevin. He would have won without that.
Others have noted that the reason Ray lost was because of what is happening in Washington, but when Steve Sviggum’s seat came up for special election, that wasn’t so long ago, and it went Republican. I’m sure there are voters in Sviggum’s old district who are dissatisfied with Washington.
I don’t think this is just a matter of looking at stats, and assuming that a certain percent who voted for Jessica Peterson came out to vote for Kevin, while more who voted for Neuville decided to stay home.
Ray’s a nice guy, of course. Just before he announced that he’d run again against David Bly, I was playing at Nordic Jam at the Contented Cow, and Ray was kind enough to buy all the musicians a drink (beer, wine, lemonade). I appreciated and drank the beer, and because he had not yet announced, it was technically legal. But I wondered why a guy who was about to declare that he’d run again, and who had complained about his opponent serving pie at a public campaign function in a city park, would risk the appearance of impropriety and hypocrisy.
Both major parties have their established base. There are some who will always vote for Ray, others who will always vote for whoever the DFL puts forward. But too much attention and strategy emphasizes turning out the base, and not enough on those voters in the middle who might be on the fence.
Rob Hardy’s comment about the truck with the Cox signs across from the polling place, and other comments here about lawn signs prepared in advance, and Barbara’s comments in post 50, are all telling. Ray is a nice guy in person, and very willing to respond to E-mails, etc. But if the law says you can’t campaign a certain number of feet from a polling place, Northfielders get the sense that he’s the kind of candidate who would have a truck with signs one inch outside that boundary (or a foot inside it, if he doesn’t get caught).
It’s not just about discontent with Bush and Washington, and it’s not just about college students, or the base of one party or another. Northfield voters know Ray and see him operate more closely and intimately than people do in the other parts of the district, and I think the message that this sends is that Ray might have won this election if he had conducted himself differently in a variety of ways already mentioned, and also, if his voting record revealed him to be the moderate he claims to be.
Instead, Ray consistently blames it all on others: Liberal Northfield, college students, anti-Bush sentiment, so hard to be a fiscal conservative, etc.
Ray’s public face is green, conservation, help lower your taxes. But scratch the surface, and he is, in fact, less a listener and a public servant than he is about pro-business ideology, and he’s an aggressive campaigner to the point of alienating voters. And I think this will continue, and if he runs again, the margin by which he’ll lose will only widen.
Carol, where do you find out all that information regarding candidate contributions and spending? Is there a state web site you know of and could provide a quick link?
Paul, that’s here
http://www.cfboard.state.mn.us/
or maybe more specifically
Cox here:
http://www.cfbreport.state.mn.us/pdfStorage/2008/CampFin/B/16659S.pdf
Dahle here:
http://www.cfbreport.state.mn.us/pdfStorage/2008/CampFin/B/16666S.pdf
Paul - of course I’ve got it bookmarked — was just digging around for lobbyist information on District Energy in St. Paul, there are more lobbyists in energy than any other area in state politics.
For Candidate lists:
http://www.cfboard.state.mn.us/cand_lists.html
Candidate reports:
http://www.cfbreport.state.mn.us/rptViewer/viewRptsCan.php
and then go to “2008 Reports”
There are the Pre-General Election reports now available, and also a handful of 48 hour notices, which are required when big money comes in. Take a look and see if you can figure out what the initials stand for. If you can’t, check out the PAC list:
http://www.cfboard.state.mn.us/pcf_lists.html
and the PAC reports:
http://www.cfbreport.state.mn.us/rptViewer/viewRptsOther.php
Oh, PAC = Political Action Committee
Hi Kiffi,
Regarding your post #24, I’ve been trying to dig around, because I do think homogeneity of the wards is important for the council members to represent their constituents consistently (try saying that one fast!). I disagree with Patrick’s post #31 a bit on this - everything I can find suggests that while precincts send delegates in the caucuses, wards ONLY determine local elections, and state house and senate and national house election districts combine multiple wards (anyone know if I’ve got it wrong??). However, for voting purposes, precincts must add to wards which must add to congressional districts, etc (as I understand it, anyway).
The requirement for contiguity likely arises from the need to combine precincts to get wards. However, the “communities of interest” requirement for precincts within wards looks to me like it’s intended to mean that a single person can represent the ward more accurately (exactly your comment). In looking at the voting map, there are numerous questionable calls but to my eye the most egregious by far are the two precincts that make up ward 4. I don’t understand how Jon can be expected to represent everyone’s various needs adequately. I would be particularly concerned if the number of people in the two precincts differed dramatically.
I had a geeky moment this evening, and I took a look at some data from the last census to get a better sense of differences across Northfield. Unfortunately, there really wasn’t enough information to see differences. At the level of “block groups” used to define regions for census data, Northfield looks reasonably similar with respect to age and gender, taking the college dip in median age into account. The rental population varies a bit, as expected, but doesn’t really get at the differences within the two precincts in ward 4. Dare I say the person who probably knows those differences best is Jon Denison?
I would be very interested in discussing districting at P&P. Maybe someone from the League of Women Voters could come explain some of the nitty gritty details?
Oh, Paul, I guess you were asking Carol. My bad! That’s the url you were looking for.
Felicity - you ask and pose a number of questions re: voting district makeup.
The precinct is the building block of elections and vote management - counting votes, campaign planing and basic election organization.
WARDS only exist in cities and but made up of precincts - depending on population numbers. Voters go to their Precinct Polling place - and precincts report the outcome of the count. Wards have elected representatives
Planing the precincts is based principally on population - attempting to get near equality in numbers, but only within a city. Other precincts in Rice County but not in Northfield Faribault, etc, have their own numbers issues. As communities grow {or diminish in population] the numbers game will determine the representation. States are concerned that changing population, some might lose some US Representatives - i.e. voice in Congress.
As Patrick and Kiffi point out, other concerns in laying out the voting districts are: Continuity in societal ways, geographic contiguity…. avoid long slim connecting channels of geographic convenience to link populated areas, and Compactness, also a top desire — but other than numbers, these other concerns are often difficult to accomplish.
Northfield was redistricted following the 2000 census… this at the behest of the Charter Commission. The thought being as N’fld grows, there is a need for more Wards. That seemed logical - but when working on the redistricting, I decided the idea was flawed - more wards do not necessarily allow for community to be segmented with the best outcomes as envisioned by the guidelines. So it is we have the bizarre Ward 4 layout.
Why this is particularly problematic for Northfield (This is Kiffi’s view - which I largely agree with) is the nature of the two neighborhoods.
Upper 4 … precinct 1 (Greenvale south to Hwy 19 - LIncoln east to Hwy 3) is composed of older homes - mostly single family, part of what might be termed “old Northfield” . Precinct 2, W 4 lies south of Jefferson Parkway and east of Hwy 3 - and extends east to about 246. These are newer homes, suburban in many ways… and many apartments. The principle difference [might be] the life styles and values of the two neighborhoods.
To be frank… while this is not set in concrete, a major difference might be the attitude imbedded in the ‘98 / ‘99 struggle over Target. There are values differences in the two districts than might be more prevalent in Ward 4 than other wards - or so it seems.
Another problem [perceived ] is the St. Olaf Precinct. As the number worked out, there are approximately 2500 residents in the dorms [regardless of their voting patterns - hometown or Northfield] all 2500 count in the census numbers for that geographic area. Ward 3 P 1 is St. Olaf.
Ward 3 - P2 is everything else in W 3 except that part of W 3 which lies in Dakota County - There is no reasonable way to split St. Olaf in to two precincts. If added to 3-2, the numbers are too big - 3-3 [Dakota County] simply further confuses the lines.
Northfield including both colleges after the 2000 census had about 16,500 [now closer to 18,000] Each of the four wards then, if made up of equal numbers would be about 4000.
You can see the imbalance that St. Olaf’s population creates. Carleton College being smaller can include its student numbers in with the general population in Ward 1 P2 [I think] with more ease.
Sometimes in major cities - one building will constitute a precinct.
In Counties - a Township is one precinct - most Rice County Twpshps have far fewer residents than a precinct in Faribault or Northfield.
County voting venues are along districts made up for the most part of complete Townships having three of the five including parts of the two major cities - including some complete precincts - You may not split a precinct.
Rice County, at last census, had about 56,000 residents. The five districts were divided at about 11,000 per district, and weird lines around Northfield and Faribault had to be be drawn - these district lines had to maintain precinct lines.
Okeh! This is far too confusing - getting far too long - and yes… you may be right, a good discussion for P and P at the Cow. but with MAPS and numbers.
I want to end with this. My thought {I haven’t put this to a test] is that Northfield made a mistake when they split into four wards - because of the geographic limitations … The colleges, the rivers, the big park area and the obvious residential expansion sites: south east and north west [the latter in Dakota county]. I think a new plan might better go back to three Wards - [easier to divide sensibly] and have two Councilors for each ward elected in alternate biennium years. This is of course a crackpot theory - and one you and your young friends will have to sort out by the year 2010.
I am very impressed with both your and Patrick’s remarks on this . Shows some real investigative interest. Good!
vs
In today’s Strib: Election gives DFL veto-proof majority
And Ariel Emery’s story in the Northfield News has been updated for today’s paper: The Northfield Landslide: Dahle wins senate victory with 76 percent of the city’s 4,862 votes
Well, there’s not much to add to that!
Victor is truly informed on that issue, having worked ( along with the various math people) on the LWV committee that, unfortunately, ended with a lawsuit against Rice County in order to get it redistricted more fairly.
I am on the LWV board and we have had NF’s need for redistricting on several recent agendas, but it’s hard to get through an agenda when there’s so many “irregularities” going on in the city process, and large discussions ensue over those gov’t processes. Practically, since we are at 2008, redistricting would not likely happen until 2010-11, when all census numbers are in.
The “communities of interest” requirement really bothers me, and I have posited that it might be better to have ALL at-large councilors rather than Ward representatives; that way they are all, hopefully, committed to the same goals of what is best for the common good, and the city.
Interesting! I have to say, looking at the map, I really like Victor’s solution of 3 wards each with two councilors. I see them as one ward on the west side of the river, and two wards on the east side probably split at Woodley. Unfortunately, that would require changing a couple of existing precincts, which might make it more difficult to achieve.
Kiffi, I think it’s important that the councilors represent a specific geographic area, because there are definitely competing interests going on. Election from a ward should guarantee that the councilor puts more weight on the needs of that group. That’s particularly important given the expansion Victor mentioned.
I’m very glad LWV is considering the districting question. I think waiting for the 2010 census to come out to have a general plan in place would be a mistake, because there are so many local variables to consider. If a general plan is ready to go, then it can be tweaked following the census results.
If there is anything to learn from this election, it would be that lawn signs don’t really show the position of the people. Seeing the volunteers in the campaign office every day told me that something good was going on.
When people would ask me for lawn signs, I would tell them that we were “out” of lawn signs because we hardly had any in the first place. We poured all of our resources into directly contacting voters. This reply would inevitably be followed by an incredulous look to which I would respond, “lawn signs can’t vote, so don’t worry about who has the most lawn signs. Everything will be fine if we just keep telling people about Kevin.”
In the end, the election came down to three very basic ideas; (a) a great candidate (thanks Kevin!); (b) a well articulated message that, “people matter and we need to make decisions at the state legislature that reflect the impact on people’s lives”; and (c) HARD WORK! Every person that supported Kevin made calls, talked to others, knocked on doors and told their friends, “Kevin Dahle is not just a good person, he will work for you and your family in St. Paul”. This is grassroots politics at it’s finest. Thanks to every person who helped to make this happen.
Felicity: Yes, I agree that Victor’s solution of three wards, each with two reps elected in alternate elections IS the better solution, but what I haven’t had time to work out is how the local reaction to the college vote ( Which is usually a negative reaction to the college vote) would impact the three ward solution and then how to create an argument that would make locals quit feeling that college students shouldn’t vote here.
I personally am totally in favor of the college students voting here if they choose to. I think the argument that says”they’re going to be here four years, or less, and then go; why should they impact our local politics” is a very specious argument. I believe most college students are not certain to go back to where they grew up for the rest of their adult lives; furthermore, how can any civic minded person conscientously discourage a new voter from participation? Aren’t we always trying to get higher voting %ages?
Anyway, I think its a really interesting subject, and I know who I’ll be calling when the planning time comes around.
p.s. you’re also right about getting plan in place , so it’s ready for final “tweaking” after the census.
Holly and Carol:
Thanks, both of you, for the links.
Ray Coudret:
Thanks for your insights.
Griff:
Did you ever figure out the 8P.M. time on the article in the News? I assumed that Ariel started writing/posting her article around the time that most of the other precints had reported, but perhaps waited with a window open for a post of her story to the News, and waited, and waited, till Northfield’s precincts were in. But maybe she had some contacts that gave her a scoop before they were posted to the Secretary of State’s website.
In general:
I wonder if some of this had to do, not just with discontent with Washington, but with discontent with trickle-down. Whenever I hear Ray (and heard Tom) talk about business and taxes, it always seemed they were trickle-down to the core: give businesses what they need to thrive, and then everyone will prosper, just trust us, etc. But look at all the fraud and profiteering related to the war in Iraq. Maybe people are more decided about (and against) trickle-down, and maybe that played a part–besides Kevin’s good networking as a good teacher, and the other factors already mentioned.
Paul, my guess is that the default time is the time the story file is opened. You can store it and open it again and unless you deliberately change it when you finish, it posts with the original time. That’s how it has worked at other sites I know.
I was checking out both the NFN’s site and the Sec of State’s site on election night. The News didn’t call the election at 8 pm. Their story was updated several times in conjunction with the results from the Sec of State.
FYI - When you want to check out what has been posted previously, what’s changed and when, just go to the site and click on “Wayback Machine.” If you don’t have this on your toolbar, well, go here, and scroll down a bit to the part where it says “click here and move to toolbar” and it will attach and give you many hours of pleasurable sleuthing! http://www.archive.org/web/web.php
If you need a reason for the large margin in the recent vote count, look to the two colleges. The results hardly reflect a representative democracy. This coming spring the students will leave our city, while the residents of this city and the rest of the state will have to live with the outcome of the past election. I would submit the students who are not residents are mostly clueless about the needs of Northfield and our state. They are allowed to vote on issues which they will not suffer the outcome. The students are nothing more than imported voters. Hardly representative.
Robert Hall
As has been posted previously, even if you subtracted out every vote cast by the students at the two colleges in town, Keven Dahle would still have been elected our new state senator.
That being said, our Constitution clearly affords every adult citizen of the United States the right to vote.
Robert Hall - please review the election results on the Secretary of State website. I don’t get why you and others persist in this “it’s the students” argument. It’s against evidence — it’s not true. Ray Cox didn’t take a single precinct in Northfield, and those are the voters who know him best. Ray Cox lost in townships that had been prior strongholds. And you’re also forgetting all of Ray’s student vote in 2002 and in 2004! If you subtracted student vote from the 2006 mix, Ray would have had even fewer votes than he did. Enough of the false excuses about why Ray Cox lost … sigh… The election is over.
Robert Hall,
I’ll go Patrick one better…
Even if you subtracted every vote for Kevin Dahle, and kept Ray’s votes, from the two “college” precincts (the Carleton precinct, at least, has many non-students in it as well, which is why I put college in quotes), Dahle still would have won.
Yes, the students contributed to the “large margin”, but Dahle only needed to win by one vote. Size of margin doesn’t alter the outcome.
I have commented extensively on this issue on Northfield.org. Not wanting to rehash the discussion or make this response extremely long, here’s a link to just one of several comments I made in defense of college student voting:
http://www.northfield.org/node/3926#comment-3374
You can scroll through several other comments made by me and other folks there.
I will say here, however, in my experience with Carleton students - I am an alum and a current employee - I have found them to be very well-informed as voters - at least as well-informed as many non-students who vote. I’m sure the same can be said of Olaf students.
Regardless, being “clueless” (as you stated) does not preclude one from voting, unless you would argue for literacy tests again, as adopted by Southern states in response to the 15th Amendment.
Although states determine voting rights, they must follow the strictures of several Constitutional amendments and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
It’s not a matter of who won or lost. Campus students are imported votes. They do not represent nor do they suffer the consequences of their vote. The residents and taxpayers foot the bill. The state of Minnesota may allow them to vote as residents to be sure, however they are not held responsible for their vote either informed or uninformed. At the end of the school year the students take a powder and head for their real home. Our college age childeren voted by absentee ballot. We thought it correct for them not be involved in community politics where they are not held responsible for their vote.
Bob
Good points, Bob. I would argue that people who live in an area 9 months out of the year, and attend school in that area, are very much effected by a vote.
College students have a voice, and as long as they don’t vote in two places (whether it be in two cities or two states), they should be considered regular, ordinary constituents.
Placing limitations on voters is a sneaky, demeaning, nasty activity that has been done many times in our history. Let’s say “NO” to any idea such a poll tax, a literacy test, a required absentee ballot, and etc.
Let’s also count every eligible voter as a whole person, and let’s not discriminate based on color of skin or for any other adjective.
C’mon, where were you when the vote was close and Ray Cox won? I didn’t hear your argument about the college vote, then.
I recently had a long conversation with two Carleton students about the recent election and the new rental ordinance. I think that learning to live in a community with other adults is, or should be, an important part of a college student’s education. They should learn to be responsible neighbors and responsible citizens of the community in which they are living for four years. Both St. Olaf and Carleton have “civic engagement” programs to address, as the Carleton website puts it, the feeling of “estrangement from the world at large” that often results from living in the “bubble” of college. As “townies,” we shouldn’t make that feeling of estrangement worse by resenting the efforts of students to become engaged in our community. We should encourage more engagement, and help students to be better neighbors and to feel more invested in Northfield. We can be a part of their education, and we can all reap the benefits of creating better citizens.
My 18-year-old daughter returned to her college home, Grinnell, Iowa on January 3rd to participate in the Iowa caucuses because she had become passionately interested in the presidential campaign and wanted to caucus for her chosen candidate, Barak Obama. She will likely vote there in the fall as well.
She could have voted here in Northfield (and would have voted for Kevin Dahle) before heading down to Iowa to caucus, and it may have even been legal for her to do so. However, after she and I consulted with the Minnesota Secretary of State’s office and the Iowa Democratic party, we agreed that it would be unethical (although probably legal) to do both, and she did NOT vote here for Dahle. I fully supported her decision to caucus in Iowa, and am thrilled that she has become politically engaged as a college student.
College students should be encouraged in every possible way to participate in the political process in whatever way they choose.
I don’t hear anyone complaining about folks who move to Northfield for a year or two (let’s say as a corporate transfer, commuting to Eden Prairie to work), vote for a Republican or Democratic candidate in a local election, but then move on to wherever their job takes them next. Many St. Olaf and Carleton students have more of a local stake than such a voter; all have a valid right to vote nonetheless.
I don’t believe two students are representive of nearly four thousand students. How are students who live on the campus of a non profit institution that pays no local or state taxes, does not provide funding for our streets, street repair or parks but is entitled to their use affected by my vote as a taxpayer and property owner?
Bob
Well, they are effected by the vote in general. It’s collaborative. Also, those St. O and C students drive on the roads, buy things, and live and work right here with us 9 months out of the year.
They may not pay property tax, but if they work around here, they pay tax. If they buy things, they pay tax.
As to the “private college” aspect– why don’t St. Olaf and Carleton pay property tax? In light of the recent daycare property tax ruling that I heard about, I believe Carleton and St. Olaf should have to pay property tax. I know, they donate… but… explain it to me.
I would much rather have constructive conversations with students, and encourage them to think of themselves as neighbors and citizens who have a stake in this community, than find reasons to resent them. I’ve known quite a few Carleton students. I think they tend to vote Democratic not because they want to spend someone else’s tax dollars, but because they can imagine other people’s lives: the plight of the poor, the plight of those who face prejudice and discrimination, the plight of those without adequate health care, the plight of those who have to try to learn and teach in underfunded schools. They vote with their imaginations, not their tax dollars. I’m okay with that. I’m a local taxpayer, but I think politics should be more about imagination and less about taxes.
First, Mr. Hall, I would be very surprised if “nearly four thousand students” are registered from the two campuses. That’s almost certainly a sizable overstatement. Many never register or vote here.
Second, since I’m assuming you didn’t read through the comments I referenced before, I’ll just cut and paste here. This was a response to an anonymous commenter on Northfield.org who was making much the same argument you are making here:
“What other tests should we place on voters? Do we demand proof at the polling place that the issue they are voting on will effect them in some way?
Regarding the tax issue you raise in particular, what about students who are renting? What about students whose parents own or rent in town? What about nursing home residents? Should they be denied the right to vote if they wish to vote?
While voting is never going to be perfect, we have state and federal laws that protect the right because we are a society… we are together.
This carping on college student voting, which was also a big issue during the Target debate in town, is, at best, partisan and self-interested, and, at worst, a dangerous step toward disenfranchising larger and larger groups of voters based on an ever-growing, impossibly byzantine web of disqualifying factors.
Additionally, the strain on the civic process of voting - monitoring those who can and cannot vote on particular questions - would be nearly impossible to control and horrendously expensive to enact. Costs that would be passed on to taxpayers.
Then there are those state and federal laws to change or circumvent.
The system is not perfect; nor can it be, but it’s endlessly better than the system that would result if we followed your argument much further.”
Sorry, should have noted that the quoted passage was one of MY responses to an anonymous commenter on Northfield.org.
I made several, and others weighed in with great points on this issue as well.
The colleges may not pay property taxes, they do give the city money:
http://northfield.org/node/3877
they also provide plenty of income taxes and the students also pay sales taxes. Probably more than they would in their home cities. 3/4 of their time is here, they should be legally allowed to vote here unless you want to take away their rights.
As a College student in Madison WI, I always voted in Madison. It was my new home. I visited my parents home on holidays, but I lived, worked and spent my income in Madison. I have not been back to my home city since I graduated from high school other than visits. I would have felt silly voting there for people I did not know and issues that did not affect me.
I would hope a voting college student would vote on reality and not their imagination. We already have enough people voting with their imaginations. We just sent another one to St. Paul. The colleges give the city money, but at their discression and not by any state statute formula. I never said that college students didn’t have the right to vote, but vote where they are a ligitimate resident and are held accountable for their voting choices. How many students do you believe have valid Mn. drivers license? If you are a resident of this state you can not drive on an out of state drivers license. College students are not an intergal part of this city. They live on the paramiter.