The [unofficial] results are in: Dahle 55.15%, Cox 42.37%, Norgaard 2.4%.
|
|||
|
Great CenturyLink bundles in Minnesota now available.
Subscribe and Follow LoGro
|
132 comments to Kevin Dahle, Our New State Senator |
Search posts, comments, pages
Current Discussion Threads
Blog Monthly ArchivesBlog Category Archives |
|
|
Copyright © 2012 Locally Grown Northfield - All Rights Reserved 
|
|||
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.
I don’t hear anyone else saying that college students’ voting in Northfield is or should be *illegal*.
Whether it’s moral or ethical or a Good Thing for students to vote on issues that don’t directly affect them is a different question. Seems to me a student might reasonably decide not to vote on a local school bonding question, for instance. But some other student might feel passionately, pro or con, about education funding issues, and therefore want to vote. Why not?
In any case, similar questions arise for all voters, not just college students. It would be nice, as Mr Hall says, if all voters were well informed and accountable. But I see no reason to worry more in these respects about college students than about others. Research on what voters (of any age) actually know about the issues is not exactly heartening.
Whereas the sentiments expressed in comment #70 are felt by a minority of other folks in town, I am surprised that you do not take a more global perspective on the term “representative. The actual college student may not be here in four years, but that person will be replaced by another student with similar interests. This means that the students who voted in 1990, were in effect representative of the students who followed them in 1992.
Furthermore, a quick look at the historical voting records from these precincts would reveal that the students who were here in 1990 voted at similar rates and percentages as those who voted in 1992.
With that stated, I must also point out the the student voting issue has been heard and upheld at the Supreme Court level.
Even more importantly, these students are a vital part of our community
--They spend a LOT of money downtown
--They provide jobs for many in our city and in District 25)
--These schools are responsible for the first public radio station
--first college football game
--visits by dignitaries
--scientists, teachers, authors and the like who are products of these schools)
--These students volunteer in our hospitals
--These students volunteer for our schools
--Volunteer efforts throughout the district through efforts such as Habitat for Humanity and the Buckthorn eradication
--Relay for Life cancer fundraiser
AND… I don’t know if you noticed but many of the people who live in our community proudly wear the dual moniker of “Towny” along with “Ole”, or “Carl”.
Yes. I do believe that these students should vote here. They, along with every other person in town, are an inseperable part of what makes Northfield, with all of it’s flaws, an incredible place to live.
With all of that said. I believe this is a healthy conversation to engage in although I do respectfully disagree with Mr. Hall in his original assertion. As Mr. Etter pointed out, the margin doesn’t matter. That was one impressive victory due to a heck of a lot of work by many, many people.
Mr. Hall,
Did you just rip on our new Senator when you said, “we just sent one to St. Paul”? You don’t have any idea about who he is and you don’t know him, yet you write something like that. I thought that type of writing was not allowed on this blog.
Are you really interested in a civil discourse or are you just grinding an old axe?
Try to imagine Northfield without the colleges. How much property tax would we lose if all of those professors, custodians, office workers and the like were gone? Where do those dollars come from? They come directly from the students tuition and/or from the alumni who donate back to the college to help with student aid or building projects.
There are economists that have estimated that every dollar spent in a community is actually spent seven times. Take the total salary for each college and multiply by seven and you will find an approximation of the impact and economic importance of these schools and these student citizens. Every one of those dollars comes from the students who pay tuition.
How can a person assert that these students don’t have an impact on their community? How can you say they aren’t citizens of Northfield?
What about people who leave during the winter months and go to warmer climates, are they allowed to vote? A few of those people will die in the next four years; shouldn’t their votes be disallowed just in case?
Am I allowed to vote here? I went on vacation for several weekends last year to Fargo. Maybe I should vote there.
What if I vote for a Republican or a Libertarian? Does that change the status?
Where is the criteria?
Oh, that’s right. The criteria has been set. It was even heard at the supreme court. Adults can vote in the precinct in which they reside. The students reside here. They sleep, eat, and study. They contribute many millions of dollars to the community… They vote here.
But I digress.
P.S. Please don’t reply by ripping on others.
Oh, and by the way… I looked up the “word” “paramiter”…I might have a bad dictionary but…
Mr. Hall, you said: “How many students do you believe have valid Mn. drivers license?”
Well, not me, for one. Does that mean I shouldn’t vote? After all, I choose not to have a license, mostly because I can get anywhere in Northfield in 15 minutes on a bike. Why should I have to have a card that represents the right to drive in order to vote? They’re not the same thing and ought not to be confused with each other.
As to your other concern about students voting with their imagination alone, consider this: I’ve lived in Northfield for 19 years. I went to the schools, and I’ve spent too much money downtown. I’ve been working here for 4 years, (Thanks, Co-Op!) and I pay income and sales taxes just like anyone else. I too have been affected by property tax hikes because my parents have had to deal with them.
I voted for the recent school tax levy because I remembered watching average class sizes go from around 15-20 to 30-40 students per class from 9th grade to 12th grade. I also was made to pay escalating fees for activities: To participate in the school’s theater program went from somewhere around $30 for the first activity and $15 for subsequent activities my freshman year to $50 for every single one by my senior year. It wasn’t fair and I wasn’t very happy about it. Anything that could be done to fix that, in my mind, should have been done, because that fee raise prevented kids who don’t have as much money as others from participating in activities. Many colleges look at a student’s extra-curricular activity history and take it into account when considering acceptance.
Obviously I’m being stereotyped a bit because I happen to be “a college student;” a class that tends to be idealist. That’s not really fair at all, because I am a realist; I vote on the grounds of what I’ve seen in this community. So before you go stereotyping all college students as lazy free-loaders (which isn’t true) that like to screw with elections just because they’re idealistic (also not true), stop and think for a moment about it.
Gabe,
Great points and well spoken. You have obviously had a fine education. Are you allowed to Blog in Northfield since you are “just a college student”? Shouldn’t you be dreaming or rigging elections with Maya, Kat and all of the rest of those nefarious individuals on the hill? ;0)
Tim O’Brien’s Blog House column in today’s Strib ends with this comment:
Michael Brodkorb has blogged about it.
Yes, it seems Tim O’Brien is noting that Brodkorb is always using negative advertising, which anyone who googled Kevin Dahle or Ray Cox during the election could already tell.
Brodkorb wrote about the Dahle/Cox race many times:
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/index.php?s=dahle
if that link doesn’t work, go to
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com and find the search box on the left hand side, and put in Dahle or Cox.
But, let’s talk about what consititues negative advertisement. I think it is an unfair attack on someone’s character, or is misleading, or is false. I don’t think voting record is negative advertising.
Here are the ads, again, as linked to from locallygrownnorthfield.org
http://locallygrownnorthfield.org/archives/2828/
While we’re at it, the Republicans really do a lot of “negative ads” or attacks on character, all the time. They do this by using separate PACs and then saying “this ad was not endorsed by any candidate.” NOTE to DFLers: They don’t have the Republican Party itself doing the advertisements. What can be learned from this? If it’s messy, refer it to those that like messy.
I wonder what Brodkorb said at people’s doors as he campaigned for Ray.
Holly, when Ray Cox and David Bly competed last, I was just this ->||<- close to getting the two of them to agree to a paired campaign, where they would both blog to a common site, responding to each other’s comments and points in a sort of long running on-line debate. They both liked the idea of talking directly to each other while the rest of us listened in. Neither of them was personally in favor of negative ads or the “nearly negative” ads that only told part of the story (e.g., “X voted against apple pie” without noting that these were alar-coated sour apples foisted by the apple union on unsuspecting students). Unfortunately, I have to work for a living, so the idea never made it past the “sure, we’ll play nice” and I have apologized to both of them for not making it happen.
Imagine how refreshing it would be if you could actually sit on the sidelines while the candidates carried on this long term conversation on issues. Imagine how refreshing it would be if they drifted to a good common solution on some topics and on other drifted to basic principles as the foundation for their disagreement. Of course, the candidates would still have to deal with the fact that outsiders will weigh in as well, but who would bother to listen to an ad when facts and opinions were out there for everyone to read?
If we (the voters) let elections degenerate to nothing more than yard signs and name recognition, then we deserve the bad results that come of electing people based on such shallow inputs.
Ray- You said, “There are economists that have estimated that every dollar spent in a community is actually spent seven times. Take the total salary for each college and multiply by seven and you will find an approximation of the impact and economic importance of these schools and these student citizens. Every one of those dollars comes from the students who pay tuition.” I’m not sure you properly applied the formula you stated. I thought the meaning was that each dollar went through seven different people. I agree with your point that the college students certainly add to the economic well being of Northfield, but I think the economic meaning of the statement is that each dollar they spend affects seven people rather than being multiplied seven times. If I’m wrong in my understanding, please let me know.
As far as students’ voting rights, I thought a person only had to live in a precinct for three months to be eligible to vote? Is this correct? These students certaily live here more than three months. And they certainly have a right to vote in the national elections.
As far as age and political convictions, I really like what Winston Churchil is credited with saying. ” If you are not a liberal when you are young, you have no heart. If you are not a conservative when you grow old, you have no sense.” If this is not his quote, please let me know. And, I don’t mean to be offensive to anyone of you readers. I just think it is a funny saying. A person can change their mind on things.
I think there are as many issues that drive the way people vote as there are people. In our system, at least, it is done peacefully and wihout recrimination. And when it comes down to it, we seem to vasilate back and forth between the political parties’ leaderships without the whole country going under (although some pundits would like to make it seem the country is going under.) I personally do not put much hope in either major party. I’m thankful that God is still on the throne.
John,
I like your point: people may change their minds over time, as their understanding of the world evolves. And that can be a very good thing.
However, I’d suggest that you not use Winston Churchill’s quote to support your sensible point of view, because it has negative connotations that I don’t think you intend.
I think the word might’ve been brain, not sense, but I’ll leave it to others to look that up.
I’m old enough now that I can laugh at that quote, but it really got my dander up when I was young. It doesn’t just say that a person can change their mind, but that they must eventually change their mind to a conservative point of view, or else they have no brain.
I heard that phrase a lot from old (and young) conservatives when I was young and liberal. It was usually followed by a statement that when I finally grew up, got a job, and paid taxes, then I’d give up my naive, idealistic ways.
The problem with it is this: it’s a dialogue killer. There is no adequate response to it. When it is said to a young liberal person, they can only say, “No I won’t.” To which the inevitable conservative response is, “You’ll see.” Then we all have to wait 20 years before we can talk again.
So after 20 years I can finally declare: it isn’t true. I’ve grown up, and I’m still not conservative. I’m also willing to make a case that I have I reasonably well-functioning brain. So let’s get back to a more useful conversation:
Here’s a guy I can have a conversation with. I’ll take John George over Churchill any day.
Bruce,
I really like your blog idea. Think you could get something like that running for the next election cycle, and we could challenge the candidates to make use of it?
Patrick- Thanks for the compliment. I love to discuss these things. When I debate someone from a different point of view, it helps me sharpen my own reasoning and see where I am not correct in my own thinking. That is one thing I love about this blog. I get an opportunity to connect with people that I do not get to rub elbows with in everyday life. How about coffee sometime? I’m usually around Monday & Tuesday.
Oh, and I’m glad I’m not Churchill. Great as he was for his time, he stll had his shortcomings, too. In those days, intolerance was tolerated. (Was that an oxymoron?)
Hi Patrick and Bruce,
Kevin Dahle does already reach out to constituents via blog. I’d be surprised if he’d be able to find the time to author yet another one…
If you want to ask him about a certain issue, you can still reach him via e-mail, blog, telephone, etc. I think he’s shown us how hard he works to listen to constituents.
He’ll be busy at the capitol, you know. By the way, I find it amazing that people can post so much on this blog. My job requires keeping up with the scene (the weblog, etc. scene) but many others with different jobs must be really good at managing their time.
It is fun, though-- this weblog age. Candidates and incumbents can tell us what’s going on in a much more conversational way, and much more often.
Oh, Bruce, you were talking about the House seat. I can’t speak for Rep. Bly, but I notice he hardly has time to sleep once session convenes.
He also tries hard to reach out to constituents via blog, though, and I think he does a good job.
Usually when economists talk about the multiplier of money spent they use it to mean that for every $1 brought into a local environment by an outsider (tourism, federal or state spending, etc.) there is an echo as the people who receive the money in turn spend it on other items. The major exceptions are companies whose profits leave the local environment (e.g., Target vs. Jacobsens). In the military we claimed up to a 7x multiplier for the wages given to the troops since they usually were shopping locally (BX not-withstanding, since WalMart was usually cheaper than the supposed great deals at the BX (base exchange, aka PX (post exchange))). So Ray’s use of the statistic was in line with what most economists seem to mean. Of course, in some way the two are equivalent (the “7″ represents the number of transactions, although in theory two of those might be buying a brew at the local pub).
Patrick, Holly. I cannot promise anything yet, but I can say that David Bly was on board once, so he might be again, IF I can find time to build the site. In the meantime, I may need virtual candidates to help test it, in which case I’d want one virtual candidate to role-play Bly and one to role-play “”. We could meet at the Contented Cow every couple of weeks during the half hour before Politics and a Pint to strategize and work out how to get this set up. I’d need political wonks who were willing to echo their chosen candidates positions and who were more interested in process than in convincing others of their positions. It might help if they were willing to learn a little about WordPress, or I have a MySQL/PhP site we could use.