MnIndy file photo

Rep. Michele Bachmann has made plenty of year-end lists, including many with not-so-flattering names, from Mother Jones’ “Capitol Hill’s Most Unhinged Republicans” to mnPACT’s “Top 10 Worst Political Persons in Minnesota 2009.” One tally where she’s getting props is by our sister site, the Washington Independent: Reporter David Weigel includes the Sixth District Republican in seventh place among “The Best and the Rightest: The Top 10 Conservatives of 2009.”

Weigel writes:

Omnipresent and ahead of the curve, the Minnesota congresswoman has become a 21st-century answer to Jesse Helms — a controversialist who gravitates to issues that drive liberals crazy. Sarah Palin’s Facebook post that alleged the creation of “death panels” in the health care bill was inspired by Bachmann’s floor speeches. The successful Republican drive to defund ACORN was borne from months of Bachmann’s attacks on the group. A year of liberal outrage has only furthered Bachmann’s credibility among conservatives: When the House passed a financial reform bill in December, Bachmann merely had to send out email alerts positioning it as a grave threat to freedom, and the conservative base was sold.

Among the tweets erased by Parry was a May 27 comment about President Obama:

“read the exclusive on Mr O in Newsweek. He is a Power Hungry Arrogant Black Man.”

Another tweet read, “What’s with the Dems and Pedophiles?”

And another erroneously interpreted voting laws: “Only those serving overseas can vote absentee!”

At the Republican endorsement convention in Faribault, Parry said he wants “a senator that is not worried about being politically correct. Welfare is meant to be a safety net, not a hammock.”

Parry did not immediately return the Minnesota Independent’s request for comment on the scrubbed tweets.

Source: Wikipedia

Minneapolis’ First Avenue night club is urging its supporters to oppose a proposed merger between Live Nation, one of the nation’s largest promotions companies, and Ticketmaster the nation’s largest ticket seller. The United Kingdom approved the merger last week prompting venues and consumer groups to ramp up efforts to urge the Department of Justice to reject the merger on anti-trust grounds.

“In the last 12 years, since Live Nation and its predecessor started its widespread take over of the concert industry, concert ticket [prices] have shot up 82 percent while the consumer price index has gone up just 17 percent,” read an email sent to First Avenue supporters on Monday. “We are concerned that if the two concert industry behemoths, Live Nation and Ticketmaster, were permitted to merge, the variety and quality of artists coming to local venues would be affected, and your prices could rise further and faster.”

Ticketmaster and Live Nation say the merger will have the opposite effect.

“If our plan happens … it can, should and will result in lower ticket prices in the primary market,” Ticketmaster CEO Irving Azoff told the Los Angeles Times. “If that plan fails to come to pass, artists, consumers and the industry will not be the better for it.”

But when questioned by Sen. Amy Klobuchar in a Senate hearing on the merger in February, Azoff conceded that past mergers hadn’t brought ticket prices down.

“Have past acquisitions that you’ve made brought tickets down, because the numbers I look at show tickets going up?” Klobuchar asked.

“No, tickets have been going up,” he replied.

Klobuchar has been skeptical of the merger.

“[Minnesotans] particularly like to listen to live music, whether it’s at larger venues, like the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul or at small music venues, such as the Minneapolis club ‘First Avenue,’” Klobuchar said in February. “Consumers deserve to know how the proposed merger between Ticketmaster and Live Nation will affect them.”

The American Antitrust Institute, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, the National Association of Ticket Brokers, the National Consumers League and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (USPIRG) have launched a new website called TicketDisaster as a clearinghouse for opposition to the merger.

Consumer groups say the Ticketmaster/Live Nation merger will create an entity that will have impact in every segment of the concert business.

“This merger would allow the merged entity to determine the prices of access to venues, concert promotion, ticketing, and other services — permitting a single firm to dominate virtually all aspects of the live event market in most cities across the country,” a statement at TicketDisaster says.

In June, 50 members of the U.S. House have sent a letter to the Department of Justice opposing the merger. First Avenue is also urging its customers to contact DoJ to reject the proposal.

“The government needs to hear from music fans now,” read the email from the nightclub. “Tell the Department of Justice that you’re against these monopolies amassing illegal power over consumers, before it’s too late.”

The Obama administration has also released details on 2,000 visits prior to that date.

Among the visitors: one William Ayers, who stopped by three times (although two of the listings show different middle names), and, on Sept. 29, the Frankens.

Are you finding any Minnesotans among the visitors?

Image: Glen, Flickr

According to a new study by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, Minnesota is below the national average in terms of our religious practices and beliefs. Fifty-percent of us cite religion as “very important” in our lives, putting our national ranking at 32 (the national average is 56 percent).

The most religious state: Mississippi. Residents there ranked first in “Belief in God,” “Frequency of Prayer” and “Worship Attendance.”

In those other categories, Minnesota is fair to middlin’: We’re below the national average in terms of the percentage of residents who say they pray at least once a day (52 percent, compared to the national average of 58 percent, giving us a rank of 35) or attend worship service at least once a week (38 percent versus 39 percent nationally, for a 25th-place finish).

Seventy percent of Minnesotans say they “believe in God with absolute certainty,” just one percentage point below the national average. Mississippi topped that category, too, with 91 percent of survey participants declaring said certainty.

Via Comedy Central.

Bachmann is smart, she’s attractive, she’s got five kids, but she doesn’t waste time on matters like “death panels” or Levi Johnston…

In 2008, one measure of the high profile of Bachmann’s seat — by those who wanted to see her leave it, as well as those hoping she’d stay — was how much money changed hands. The district saw among the nation’s highest levels of  campaign fundraising and spending in the nation, according to new Federal Election Commission reports: Bachmann spent $3.6 million and raised $2.5 million in 2008, earning her rankings of 28th and 17th among incumbents nationwide, respectively; DFL challenger Elwyn Tinklenberg ranked 42nd out of 50, spending $2.5 million. (The race was dwarved by the battle between Al Franken and Norm Coleman, however; FEC reports show Franken took in $22.5 million, while Coleman received $19.3 million.)

But another measure of Bachmann’s stature is mention a district away in Democratic candidate Maureen Hackett’s campaign to unseat Third District Republican, Rep. Erik Paulsen. A new fundraising email from Hackett mentions Bachmann more times than it does Paulsen, Roper writes.

The appeal begins:

Erik Paulsen is on the National Republican Congressional Committee’s “Patriot” must-defend list for good reason. After campaigning in 2008 as an heir to the moderate and responsible legacy of Jim Ramstad, he’s spent his first year in Washington following in lock-step behind another well-known Minnesotan—Michele Bachmann.

While Bachmann’s extremism has won her great reviews from her right-wing base, it’s not acceptable here in the 3rd District. We have a long record of electing reasonable people from both sides of the aisle. By standing with Bachmann on the economy, health care and women’s rights, Paulsen has proven time-and-time again that he’s hopelessly and completely out-of-step with the people he was elected to represent.

Correction: This post originally attributed the Hackett story to the Strib’s Rachel Stassen-Berger, instead of to Roper, the paper’s Washington correspondent.

Sen. Mee Moua

Several of Minnesota’s members of Congress, as well as state Sen. Mee Moua, have condemned the forced movement of Hmong out of Thailand and into Laos where advocates say they could face discrimination and persecution.

State Sen. Mee Maou, DFL-St. Paul, whose family came to Minnesota as Hmong refugees in 1978, condemned the actions of Thailand.

“The bilateral agreement between the Thai military and the government of Laos to forcibly deport these families back to Laos in spite of concerns expressed by the international community, as well as multiple human rights organizations, is not in alliance with the good spirit of international human rights,” she said in a statement. “The Thai government must honor international law and immediately desist this deportation.”

Rep. Betty McCollum echoed those sentiments.

“The forced repatriation to Laos by Thai authorities of more than 4,500 Hmong refugees from Huay Nam Khao in Phetchabun, Thailand, violates the basic principle of human dignity and decency upheld by international law,” she said. “The safety and well being of this group is vital, and I will continue to work closely with the U.S. Department of State and the Lao government to monitor the reintegration process of this group in Laos.”

Senators from Wisconsin and Minnesota, which together have some of the largest communities of Hmong families in the United States, crafted a joint statement condemning the actions. Sens. Russ Feingold, Herb Kohl, Al Franken and Amy Klobuchar said Tuesday:

“We strongly condemn the decision by the Royal Thai Government to forcibly repatriate over 4,000 Hmong back to Laos. This was done over the objections of the United Nations, the U.S. Government, and international human rights groups. This action violates humanitarian and refugee principles and could have serious repercussions. We share the concern of many of our Hmong-American constituents whose loved ones have been forced to return, and we will be paying close attention as the Hmong are resettled in Laos. We urge the Government of Laos to ensure the safety and well being of these individuals and to allow immediate and ongoing monitoring by international observers at all stages of the resettlement and reintegration process.”

The Hmong people were recruited by the CIA in 1961 as part of a secret operation to fight the Communists of North Vietnam. When the United States withdrew from southeast Asia, the Hmong were targeted by the Communist regimes in the region. Many Hmong fled to the United States, but others were left behind in Thailand and Laos.

Last year, Al Jazeera produced a series focusing on the situation for the Hmong living in Laos.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). Photo: WDCpix

Ironing Out Health Reform

After months of marathon hearings, partisan bickering and fiery floor debate, Democrats in both the House and the Senate have passed expansive health care reform bills. Now comes the hard part.

Although the two Democratic bills share the central goals of controlling health care costs and covering millions of uninsured Americans, they diverge, in key places, over how to go about it. Some of the differences concern the very topics that have been most contentious throughout the debate, including whether to create a public insurance option, what to do with illegal immigrants and how to ensure that federal funds don’t subsidize abortions. The disparities leave Democratic leaders with the unenviable task of merging the proposals while preserving the backing of the fragile coalitions that ushered the bills to passage in November and December. As difficult as it was for Democratic leaders then to unite their party behind the most sweeping health care reforms since the 1960s, the final step may prove the slipperiest yet.

The Money Must Come From Somewhere

Unlike the Republicans’ sweeping health reforms of 2003, which were unfunded, the Democrats have proposed to pay for the cost of their health care overhaul. But the two chambers would do it differently. House leaders are pushing a 5.4 percent payroll tax hike on the nation’s wealthiest people — individuals making more than $500,000 per year and families earning more than $1 million. Senate Democrats have proposed a similar mechanism, hiking Medicare’s payroll tax by 0.5 percent on individuals pulling in more than $200,000 and families earning more than $250,000. But a larger chunk of funding under the Senate bill would come from an excise tax on high-cost insurance plans — a provision that’s wildly unpopular among a key Democratic constituency: organized labor.

Kids’ Care

Few federal programs have been as successful as the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, which was enacted 12 years ago and now covers roughly 10 million people. Yet House Democrats have proposed to terminate the program at the end of 2013, shifting those kids into either Medicaid or private plans found on a proposed insurance marketplace, dubbed the exchange. The Senate bill, on the other hand, would reauthorize CHIP through 2019 and provide funding for it through 2015.

Many children’s welfare advocates have put their weight squarely behind the Senate approach, fearing that the move to exchange plans will lead to higher out-of-pocket costs for some of the country’s lowest-income families — a barrier discouraging those parents from buying their kids insurance at all, thereby threatening to reduce kids’ coverage in the name of expanding it.

Closing the Doughnut Hole

Democratic leaders in both chambers have vowed to close the coverage gap in Medicare’s prescription drug benefit — known as the doughnut hole — but only the House bill actually does it. The trouble is that the lower chamber would fund that provision by allowing states to haggle directly with drug makers on behalf of their lowest-income seniors — a proposal that Senate leaders and the White House have promised not to support as part of an $80 billion deal cut with the pharmaceutical industry earlier in the year.

That leaves conference negotiators with two choices: Break the deal with Big Pharma or find some other way to fund the elimination of the doughnut hole. A third choice — not to close the coverage gap fully — seems unlikely from a Democratic Party hoping to win over a skeptical senior population in the run-up to the 2010 elections.

Anti-Trust

Democrats have long eyed a repeal of the anti-trust exemption enjoyed by the insurance industry, and the House bill would do just that, overturning a 64-year-old law that allows companies to share cost and coverage information without federal scrutiny. The provision didn’t fly in the Senate, however, due to the opposition of Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.), the moderate Democrat whose close ties to the insurance industry include a stint as CEO of the Omaha-based Central National Insurance Group. Although an earlier version of the Senate bill would have eliminated the anti-trust exemption, Senate leaders later bowed to Nelson by plucking that language from the bill.

Abortion Coverage

Concerned that taxpayer dollars would be used to subsidize abortion coverage on the exchange, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) led a group of moderate Democrats in threatening to kill the House bill unless it explicitly prohibited exchange plans from covering abortion. And they won.

The Senate restrictions aren’t quite so severe, allowing women to buy abortion coverage from exchange plans if they write two separate premium checks — one for abortion services and one for all other treatments. Though it was seen as a less stringent form of the Stupak amendment, the Senate language has still alienated many liberals who say it goes too far to restrict women from getting comprehensive care. Stupak, meanwhile, says it doesn’t go far enough. Satisfying both camps will require some delicate wording.

Illegal Immigration

Both the House and Senate bills would prevent illegal immigrants from getting taxpayer subsidies for insurance coverage on the exchange. But the Senate bill is the more restrictive of the two, prohibiting undocumented folks from buying exchange plans even if they pay full price. That provision has angered a number of liberal and Hispanic lawmakers, who have questioned how letting workers buy a product from U.S. companies with U.S. dollars could be a threat to the country’s well-being. The Senate provision, critics point out, would also encourage illegal immigrants to use emergency rooms for primary care services. Still, with the 2010 elections looming, Democrats will be tempted to go with the Senate provision for simple fear of lending campaign ammunition to Republican challengers.

Public Option

It’s been the most prominent of the hot-button issues surrounding health care reform from the start, and observers of the conference negotiations will be watching closely to see what Democrats will finally do with the proposal to create a public insurance option to compete with private companies. The House bill includes such a provision, but Senate leaders were forced to yank a similar proposal when Sens. Nelson and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) threatened to withhold their support. Many liberal lawmakers have said that the public plan is vital to reforming a health care system made more dysfunctional by for-profit insurance companies whose incentive is to deny care rather than pay for it. But with no sign that either Nelson or Lieberman will have a change of heart, negotiators will have little choice but to pluck the House provision for the sake of passing the larger bill.

“I expect the final bill will be pretty much the Senate bill,” Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) told The Charleston Gazette last week, “simply because we have to get the 60 votes.”