Parry, a relative newcomer to politics, won his seat in the Minnesota state Senate in a special election in February 2010 and then won re-election that November. He’s the owner of a pizza restaurant in Waseca.

Parry is facing a host of potential competitors for the GOP endorsement, but on Monday received the support of GOP State Party Deputy Chair Michael Brodkorb, who resigned to advise Parry’s campaign.

MPR reports that State DFL Chair Ken Martin slammed Parry as “an angry, ultra conservative Tea-Party Republican more concerned with pandering to the right wing and special interests than he is with working to improve our state economy, create jobs or build a more prosperous future for middle-class families.”

Parry’s become known in Minnesota politics for his liberal and incendiary use of Twitter. He created a minor national incident when he was running for his current seat and tweeted that President Obama “is a power hungry arrogant black man.”

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

During the 2011 state government shutdown, Parry tweeted that he thought Gov. Mark Dayton should resign.

“With all due respect, Mondale and Carlson need to stay in their rockers unless they can get Dayton to do the right thing. … RESIGN!” he tweeted.

That led to a strong rebuke from the editorial boards of newspapers in his district.

On the legislative front, Parry proposed a constitutional amendment on Minnesota sovereignty.

The bill would have made Minnesota the first state to require a two-thirds majority vote in the legislature to approve federal laws affecting the state. “Minnesotans enjoy inherent, natural, God-given rights,” the bill read, and “Citizens of Minnesota are sovereign individuals, subject to Minnesota law and immune from any federal laws that exceed the federal government’s enumerated constitutional powers.”

On Tuesday, Rep. Tim Walz joined all but one of his Minnesota DFL colleagues in support of a repeal of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which prevents the federal government from recognizing legally married same-sex couples.

The Defense of Marriage Act passed into law in 1996. Walz is the latest lawmaker to sponsor the repeal effort in the House, bringing the number up to 122 representatives. U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler of New York said the bill has been offered every year, but that this year it has gathered the greatest number of sponsors in its history.

Reps. Keith Ellison and Betty McCollum are original sponsors of the Respect for Marriage Act which was introduced in March. Sen. Al Franken is an original sponsor in the Senate, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar joined him this summer. Rep. Collin Peterson is the only DFLer in Minnesota’s delegation that hasn’t signed the repeal.

“Getting married to my wife Gwen and building our life together was the best thing that ever happened to me,” Walz said in a statement. “I simply cannot imagine why we would want to ban our fellow Americans from that commitment. Martin Luther King Jr. once said ‘The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.’ I believe that arc is getting shorter and I look forward to a day in my lifetime when Americans are not discriminated on based on who they love.”

The repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act would ensure that same-sex couples who have been legally married in the United States would have access to federal benefits such as social security, file jointly on tax forms and enjoy less onerous immigration requirements for binational couples.

Same-sex couples can legally mary in Iowa, New York, Massachusetts, District of Columbia, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Connecticut, and the sovereign nations of the Coquille and Suquamish. In addition, couples married in California prior to the passing of Proposition 8 in 2008 hold valid marriage licenses in that state.

“As the march toward full equality for LGBT Americans is seeing some real, concrete progress, the movement to repeal DOMA is steadily growing stronger and more robust,” Nadler said of the 122 sponsors. “The coalition working for LGBT rights in the Congress and the nation as a whole is larger than ever before, and we gain new allies every day. And, just this year, New York State enacted marriage equality, hammering one more nail into the coffin of bigotry and discrimination against gays and lesbians. Dumping DOMA is simply not a question of if, but when.”

Despite a courts-driven redistricting plan that could drastically reshape Minnesota’s 8th Congressional District, candidates are lining up to challenge freshman Republican Rep. Chip Cravaack. Swept into Congress in the 2010 Republican tidal wave, Cravaack is widely viewed as vulnerable, and a slate of accomplished candidates from the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party attests to that perceived weakness. Each challenger hopes to win the nomination and take back a district which had been held by the DFL for 63 years.

Minnesota’s 8th stretches from the northern exurbs of the Twin Cities to the Canadian border, encompassing the mining communities of the Iron Range, the northern forests and the state’s “arrowhead” region. Economically depressed over the past few decades, the district maintains a strong labor movement and economically progressive values, with tourism, mining, agriculture and shipping out of port cities on Lake Superior making up the region’s top industries.

Over the past eight months, Cravaack has been hammered by political ads that suggest he wants to end Medicare, based on his vote in favor of Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget plan that aimed to change Medicare to a voucher system, a move Cravaack’s critics said would “end Medicare as we know it.”

Cravaack’s vulnerabilities may be exacerbated by his announcement in July that he’ll be moving his family from Minnesota to New Hampshire. The move may strengthen criticisms that his ties to the district are light: In the 2010 election, he was dubbed a “packsacker,” the Iron Range term for “carpetbagger,” for living in Lindstrom, a town at the extreme southern end of the expansive district.

After winning election, he acknowledged he’d have a tough fight for re-election. He vowed to only serve four terms but acknowledged voters may only let him serve one. “I realize this is a very highly Democratic area,” he said. “I also realize there’s a lot of people that really don’t like me being here in this seat.”

His greatest advantage: He’s raised $405,000 so far for his upcoming campaign, besting his challengers.

Against that backdrop, Cravaack has picked up three DFL challengers, two of whom have experience running congressional campaigns and two hailing from major cities in the district.

Former Bachmann challenger Tarryl Clark

Tarryl Clark

Clark, a former state senator in the St. Cloud area, moved to Duluth this spring to take on Cravaack. She gained nationwide attention in 2010 during her unsuccessful campaign to unseat tea partier and conservative firebrand Rep. Michele Bachmann in Minnesota’s 6th Congressional District.

In a message to Facebook fans last week, Clark made it clear she’s still gunning for Bachmann — or at least trying to tie Bachmann to Cravaack.

“Chip Cravaack, Michele Bachmann and the rest of the Tea Party is willing to torpedo our fragile economy to fulfill their ideological agenda,” she wrote. “Adding insult to injury, they’re now trying to raise money off of their extremism. In this crucial moment, America deserves better from its leaders.”

Clark lost to Bachmann 52 to 40 percent, but she demonstrated fundraising prowess, raising enough — more than $4 million — to place her near the top among challengers nationwide in the 2010 election cycle. The race was the country’s most expensive, with more than $15 million raised between the two candidates.

Clark has been endorsed by Women Winning, a Minnesota group dedicated to electing pro-choice women. She has taken in $148,000 in donations so far in 2011.

Former U.S. Rep. Rick Nolan

Rick Nolan

Clark isn’t the only candidate with experience in Minnesota’s 6th Congressional District. Rick Nolan held the seat currently held by Bachmann from 1975 to 1981. The district had a much different shape back then, extending from northwestern Hennepin County west to the South Dakota border and north to Mille Lacs County.

“I never intended to seek public office again,” Nolan said at a press conference announcing his campaign for Congress in mid-July. “My view has changed because the times have changed. America is at a tipping point both economically and socially. The American dream is in jeopardy in what I believe to be the most dangerous and challenging time since the Great Depression.”

Nolan was born in Brainerd and owns a saw mill in the district.

He’s been endorsed by state Rep. Ryan Winkler, DFL-Golden Valley, who was born in Bemidji, and former Rep. Tim Faust of Mora. He’s not yet reported any fundraising numbers to the FEC.

Duluth City Council member Jeff Anderson

Jeff Anderson

Jeff Anderson announced his campaign for Cravaack’s seat in May. In the Duluth News Tribune last week, he accused Cravaack of abandoning his populist campaign message.

“As a candidate, Cravaack rode a populist message into office,” Anderson wrote. “He promised to be more in tune with the people of the 8th Congressional District and ‘bring Minnesota to Washington D.C,. instead of bringing Washington D.C., to Minnesota,’ as he said at a candidate forum in Duluth. Cravaack successfully sold this message to people across the district.”

Anderson added, “But since being elected, he has veered wildly from his populist message, which swept him into office, and has adopted a far-right agenda that has washed away nearly everything he promised to do on the campaign trail.”

By voting to cut taxes for “Big Oil” and ending Medicare, Anderson said, Cravaack “showed he doesn’t really understand there are far more people dependent on Medicare in his district than there are oil tycoons.”

Anderson is also the only openly gay candidate in the race, a trait that may be a hindrance in the somewhat socially conservative 8th.

But Aaron Brown, a journalist on the Iron Range, recently wrote that Anderson is handling it well.

“His historic role as Duluth’s first openly gay city councilor is an admirable badge of courage in this traditional district,” Brown wrote. “Nevertheless, in a year that will see a divisive anti-equality constitutional amendment on the ballot, he’ll be forced to talk about his personal life in ways others wouldn’t. That’s not right, but it’s a thing.”

He added, “To his credit, Anderson is acutely aware of the challenge and speaks about it openly in his meetings with DFLers. It’s possible that voters won’t be as concerned with the issue as some believe.”

Anderson has taken in $30,400 so far in his campaign.

Although not announced, rumors have swirled in the district that Iraq War veteran and former staffer for Sen. Al Franken, Daniel Fanning, may also jump into the race.

This report is part of collaboration with WNYC’s “It’s a Free Country” to cover the 25 most captivating congressional races from around the country.

Jan Markell, an end-times preacher and longtime friend of Michele Bachmann, defended anti-Islam statements by Lynne Torgerson, Rep. Keith Ellison’s first announced challenger for the 2012 election. In late-June, Torgerson launched her campaign at Tea Party Nation by calling Ellison a “radical Islamist” who “fails to oppose banning Islamic Sharia law in the United States.” Ellison responded by accusing her of running a campaign “based on hate, division, and fear.” In an interview on Friday, Markell defended Torgerson.

She said that Ellison’s faith has made Minnesota conservatives uncomfortable.

“And it stems from his association with Islamic groups that are questionable, including organizations like [the] Council on American-Islamic Relations,” Markell told OneNewsNow. “But Torgerson has been asking Keith Ellison to make a bold statement that the U.S. Constitution trumps Sharia Law.”

In 2006, Ellison became the first Muslim elected to the U.S. House.

“I guess I wouldn’t say I’m not particularly proud of that, but I’m certainly not going to go to war over it either,” Markell said of Ellison’s accomplishment. “But Torgerson has every right to question Keith Ellison and not be charged with intolerance.”

The media outlet Markell spoke with, OneNewsNow, is run by the American Family Association, an organization the Southern Poverty Law Center has named a hate group.

Markell raised concerns in 2008 when a talking Mattel doll appeared to be spouting pro-Islam messages in its prerecorded babbling. Mattel insisted that the babbling was simply that — sounds that a baby might make.

Markell is not a stranger to bringing her end-times message to the political world. Bachmann has been a frequent guest on her radio show, including a 2009 appearance when she and Markell joked that conservative Christians had become the new Taliban.

Bachmann appeared on Markell’s radio many times in 2004 and 2005 to speak out against gays and lesbians, a theme that Markell has frequently discussed in addition to anti-Islam commentary.

Markell insinuated — as did many other conservative Christian leaders — that a tornado hit downtown Minneapolis in August 2009 because Lutherans had voted to allow gay and lesbian clergy in the church.

Torgerson ran against Ellison in 2010, garnering 3 percent to Ellison’s 69 percent.

Rep. Michele Bachmann is one of 81 cosponsors of a House resolution that would condemn President Obama for his decision to discontinue the federal government’s defense of the Defense of Marriage Act. Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder reached a conclusion that parts of DOMA were unconstitutional and therefore the federal government could no longer defend the act.

The resolution “condemns the Obama administration’s direction that the Department of Justice should discontinue defending the Defense of Marriage Act; and demands that the Department of Justice continue to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in all instances.”

House Speaker John Boehner has directed the House’s legal counsel to resume defense of DOMA.

The resolution writers also took a dig at Obama by asserting that he was defending the Affordable Car Act that conservatives view as unconstitutional while denouncing the unconstitutionality of DOMA.

Bachmann is the only member of Congress from Minnesota who has signed on to the resolution.

Here’s the full text:

Expressing the sense of Congress with respect to the Obama administration’s discontinuing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act.

Whereas on February 23, 2011, President Barack Obama ordered the Justice Department to drop its defense of a central part of the 1996 law that bars the Federal Government from recognizing same-sex unions, the Defense of Marriage Act, and both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder concluded the law is unconstitutional;

Whereas President Obama himself has said that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman;

Whereas passed by significant majorities in both chambers of Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton, the Defense of Marriage Act has never been overturned in any Federal lawsuit challenging its constitutionality by a Federal Court, yet the Department of Justice has decided not to defend this act in Federal court;

Whereas on the contrary, the Department of Justice is vigorously defending in numerous Federal courts across the country President Obama’s signature health care reform law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148), and the related Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Public Law 111-152), after these bills barely passed both chambers of Congress on party line votes, and whose critical Individual Mandate provision has been declared unconstitutional by, separate Federal district courts in the cases of Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services, Case No.: 3:10-cv-91-RV/EMT (N.D. Fla., Jan. 31, 2011), and Virginia ex rel. Cuccinelli v. Sebelius, No. 3:10cv188-HEH (E.D. Va., filed Dec. 13, 2010); and

Whereas the vast majority of Americans believe that marriage should continue to be what it always has been–the legal and spiritual union between one man and one woman: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That the Congress–

(1) condemns the Obama administration’s direction that the Department of Justice should discontinue defending the Defense of Marriage Act; and

(2) demands that the Department of Justice continue to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in all instances.

With the new Legislature sworn into session on Tuesday, one new official is coming under scrutiny for opinions he’s shared in the letters pages of local newspapers. Republican Glenn Gruenhagen, elected to the Minnesota House in November to represent Glencoe after Rep. Laura Brod retired, has been assigned to the Health and Human Services Committee. His controversial public statements about welfare, anal sex, abortion and alcoholism — areas the committee oversees — could make for interesting political theater in the months ahead.

The HHS committee deals with the state’s safety net programs — programs Gruenhagen has compared to prostitution schemes, as Bluestem Prairie reported after his GOP endorsement in May.

“Government run welfare programs are little more than a government subsidized prostitution program paying extra money to women who have children out of wedlock,” he wrote. “This has contributed to over a 70% out of wedlock birth rate for Americans with an African heritage. Also, welfare provides financial support to able bodied men instead of incentives for an honest days [sic] work.”

On abortion and substance abuse, two health issues the committee will deal with, Gruenhagen has been vocal about his beliefs.

“The pro-death abortion crowd continually attempts to lie to themselves and the American people that unborn children are not really human,” he wrote in a letter to the Hutchinson Leader. “Of course, medical science has completely proven them wrong, but just like the blind leading the blind, they continue to regurgitate the mantra of Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Party.”

Gruenhagen has said that alcoholism is not a disease and has no genetic basis, despite evidence to the contrary.

Labeling alcoholism and drug addiction as a disease is not only medically inaccurate (since there is no germ or gene), it also sends a false message to the abuser that they are a victim rather than to accept some level of personal responsibility for their abuse and behavior. In addition, it sends the completely wrong message to our young people about the dangers of alcohol and illegal drug abuse.

I voluntarily participated in Gideon International jail ministry with local prisoners for over 13 years. One of the questions I routinely asked prisoners was “how many of you were on alcohol or illegal drugs when you were arrested?” The answer was almost always the same: over 90 percent said “yes.” By the way, you won’t get a DWI for driving with cancer.

Labeling alcoholism and drug addiction as a disease is a recent trend and is bad for both the addicted and the non-addicted. It is rooted in a false psychological medical philosophy that everyone is a victim when it comes to wrong and bad behavior.

The HHS committee’s purview includes sex education and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Gruenhagen has taken a particular interest in sodomy, defined by Minnesota statute as “carnally knowing any person by the anus or by or with the mouth.”

In the Hutchinson Leader, he wrote:

Many have great concern for our country as we have drifted from the Judeo-Christian principles which gave us our liberties and freedoms, into the religion of atheism, such as the belief in abortion, pornography, sodomy as an orientation, evolution, etc. The corruption of atheistic values in our schools and government institutions leaves open the door for a foreign religious value system to influence our country’s culture.

He elaborated in a letter to the Glencoe News:

The primary purpose of my letters to the editor has been to alert the public to the danger of the homosexual agenda, which is the full acceptance and legitimizing of their lifestyle in every aspect of our society. One of their first objectives is to mandate the teaching of this very destructive behavior as normal to the children in our public schools and eventually in all schools.

We, as citizens, need to encourage our social workers, public health nurses, medical professionals, pastors, lawyers and political leaders in our community and state, to oppose this agenda and protect our children from the destructive and confusing influence of homosexuality.

It comes down to this: If you don’t believe that we should be teaching sodomy as a normal behavior to our children, it is time to stand up and say something publicly and voice your dissent before the legal door is closed through hate crimes legislation. . . .

As Bluestem Prairie notes, Gruenhagen tried to get a resolution passed at the Minnesota School Board Association to have what he calls “sodomy as an orientation” banned from schools:

BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE MINNESOTA SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION URGES THE LEGISLATURE TO SUPPORT LEGISLATION PROHIBITING THE TEACHING OF SODOMY AS AN ORIENTATION TO OUR CHILDREN IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, AT AN AGE APPROPRIATE LEVEL, STUDENTS SHOULD BE TAUGHT THE PUBLIC HEALTH RISKS AND THE MEDICAL FACTS OF THE PRACTICE OF SODOMY, WHETHER PRACTICED BETWEEN TWO MEN, OR A MAN AND A WOMAN. ANY CURRICULUM WHICH PRESENTS INDIVIDUALS WHO PRACTICE THE MEDICALLY PROVEN UNHEALTHY BEHAVIOR OF SODOMY IN A SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE CONTEXT SHALL BE PROHIBITED IN THE CLASSROOM. STUDENTS WILL ALSO BE TAUGHT THAT IT IS COMPASSIONATE AND IN ACCORD WITH OUR PUBLIC HEALTH LAWS TO HELP PEOPLE STOP A BEHAVIOR THAT SPREADS SICKNESS, DISEASE, PAIN, SUFFERING AND DEATH. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT WHICH GIVES PEOPLE THE FREEDOM TO PRACTICE BEHAVIOR THAT SPREADS INFECTIOUS DISEASES. WE HAVE ALWAYS HAD PUBLIC HEALTH LAWS IN OUR COUNTRY.

Gruenhagen’s tenacity at bringing up these contentious religious-based issues in his capacity as a school board member prompted five members of the Glencoe-Silver Lake School Board to issue a letter to the editor of the McLeod County Chronicle. There can be little doubt that on the HHS committee he will be as vocal.

With regularity, Mr. Gruenhagen inserts his own biases into school board meetings with not the least provocation. Abortion, homosexuality, safe sex, evolution and countless other topics that do not appear on the school board’s agenda are brought to the fore, repeatedly, and forced onto unsuspecting school board members, administrators and individuals in the viewing audience.

To do so is rude, a violation of school board decorum, a waste of attendees’ time and a disruption in the flow of otherwise quality public meetings.

The school board is tired of Mr. Gruenhagen’s inappropriate behavior and is intent that, over time, repeated actions on his part will not be met with sympathy, understanding, patience and tolerance, as they have in the past.

Gruenhagen has not responded to the Minnesota Independent’s interview request. The Minnesota Independent asked several social service and reproductive health organizations for comment on Gruenhagen, but most said they’d sit back and wait to see how the session unfolds.

Rep. Tim Walz is one of three members of Congress to return his congressional pay raise to the U.S. Treasury, ABC News reported Tuesday. According to quarterly disbursement reports, Walz has returned his raises to the treasury each year since he came to Washington. Walz, along with Republican Reps. Spencer Bachus of Alabama and Frank Lobiondo of New York, are the only ones who have rejected raises in Congress despite intense rhetoric from tea partiers and Republicans regarding the growing national debt.

ABC News notes that other members may be returning their raises but not reporting them on their reports, and that Walz does so for the sake of transparency.

“It’s a token measure, but it’s something I can do,” he said. “I don’t want to sound self righteous on this. I just want to set an example. I’m proud of what I’m doing, but I don’t want to be seen as the ‘look at me, look at what I’m doing.’ The theme for me is the transparency and the openness and doing my part.”

In 2008, Walz announced his plans to give the funds back. “I came here to change our priorities in Washington. I don’t think it’s fair for Congress to give itself a pay raise when it can’t stick to a budget,” he said at the time. “I made a promise to the people of southern Minnesota, and I intend to keep it.

This year Walz has returned $6,588 to the national deficit, which currently stands at $1.3 trillion.

Rep. Tim Walz will be the new co-chair of the National Guard and Reserve Components Caucus at the start of the new Congress in January. Walz, the highest ranking enlisted soldier to ever serve in the House, will share the post with Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter of California. Walz will join several other members of Minnesota’s congressional delegation who also serve as chairs of caucuses in the House.

In a press release announcing Walz’ new post, Hunter said, “I am honored to serve as co-chair of the Guard and Reserve Caucus alongside Tim, who served our country in the National Guard and is also one of the strongest advocates in Congress for our servicemen and women. Tim’s insight and experience make him a perfect fit to help lead the caucus and I look forward to working with him on the issues that matter most to the Guard and Reserve, and its families.”

Walz has the backing of an array of groups in his new post including the National Guard Association of the United States, the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States, the Marine Corps Reserve Association, the Association of the US Navy, the Retired Enlisted Association, the Reserve Officers Association and the Reserve Enlisted Association.

Walz isn’t alone among state delegates for serving as chair of a caucus. Rep. Michele Bachmann founded and chairs the House Tea Party Caucus; Rep Erik Paulsen chairs the Med Tech Caucus; and Rep. Keith Ellison is the new co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus.

A bill authored by Rep. Betty McCollum to prevent child marriage abroad was defeated in the House late last week by Republicans who said the bill might fund abortion. The International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act passed the Senate unanimously early last week without Republican objection. McCollum called the GOP’s efforts to kill the bill “blatant phony arguments.”

The bill was created to “provide assistance, including through multilateral, nongovernmental, and faith-based organizations, to prevent the incidence of child marriage in developing countries and to promote the educational, health, economic, social, and legal empowerment of girls and women as part of the strategy established pursuant…to prevent child marriage in developing countries.”

But when the bill reached the House after the Senate, Republican leaders circulated a memo urging members of the party to vote against the bill.

“The bill provides little structure or oversight on how the money may be spent,” the memo read. “The President is authorized under this bill to provide assistance through nongovernmental organizations that are charged with the promotion of ‘health’ of girls and women. It is possible that some of these NGOs may view abortion as health care and promote abortion services as a part of that health care.”

Under House rules, the bill needed a two-thirds majority to pass because the bill was fast-tracked on the chamber’s suspension calendar.

All DFL members of Minnesota’s congressional delegation voted for the bill, as did Republican Rep. Erik Paulsen. Reps. Michele Bachmann and John Kline voted against the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act.

McCollum was miffed at the failure of the bill which was expected to pass easily in the House. Calling the statements that the bill would fund abortions “completely untrue,” she said, “The International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act failed last night not because of the issue, but because a handful of Republicans chose partisan politics over the basic human rights of young girls. I am truly disappointed in this result, but I’m not giving up on these children.”

She added, “Senate Democrats and Republicans didn’t play partisan politics in this vote; they unanimously recognized that the United States can and should become a leader in the fight against child marriage. Had this legislation contained abortion provisions or authorized new spending, it never would have unanimously passed the Senate.”

The U.S. House passed the tax cut compromise proposed by President Obama on Thursday night, splitting Minnesota’s congressional delegation in strange ways. Staunch conservatives and liberals voted together, albeit for different reasons. The majority of ‘no’ votes came from Democrats. The bill passed by a vote of 277-148 and will now be sent to Obama for a signature.

Voting for the bill were Reps. John Kline, James Oberstar, Erik Paulsen, Collin Peterson and Tim Walz. Voting against the bill were Reps. Michele Bachmann, Keith Ellison and Betty McCollum.

Bachmann opposed the bill because it contained an extension of unemployment benefits that she wanted paid for, while Ellison and McCollum objected to the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

Before the vote, progressive Democrats offered an amendment to reduce the estate tax exemption so that those with $3.5 million are taxed instead of a cap at $5 million. The amendment would have also raised the estate tax from 35 percent to 45 percent.

Ellison, McCollum and Oberstar voted to increase the estate tax while Walz and Peterson joined the Republicans. That amendment failed.