Democratic Reps. Betty McCollum and James Oberstar joined with Republican Rep. Jim Ramstad in supporting the bill, while Democratic Reps. Tim Walz and Collin Peterson joined Republican Reps. John Kline and Michele Bachmann in opposing the measure. Rep. Keith Ellison did not vote.

Walz (pictured) explained his vote in a statement Wednesday. “Nothing in this bill will prevent the auto manufacturers and their suppliers from continuing to move jobs overseas,” he said. “And we have no guarantee that spending $15 billion in taxpayers’ money will actually solve the Big Three’s problems. We must preserve and create jobs in America but this isn’t the way to do it.”

Bluestem Prairie, a blog that follows news about Walz, notes that the Star Tribune reprinted a New York Times article that incorrectly states that Walz and Peterson voted for the bill. In another area of the paper, they reprint an Associated Press article that got the votes correct.

“I am committed to fiscal responsibility and to changing the way Washington works,” said Rep. Walz in a press release. “The reinstatement of pay-as-you-go budgeting has finally put this country back on the right track towards a balanced budget, but until we reach that milestone I will refuse any pay increase.”

Walz has refused to accept a pay increase until the federal budget is balanced.

“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,” said Walz. “I made a promise to the people of southern Minnesota, and I intend to keep it.”

As Blue Stem Prairie points out, Rep. Randy Demmer, Republican contender for Walz’s seat, took some heat last legislative session for collecting a per diem on days he was absent from the legislature while on a trip to meet with Karl Rove.

“Now the president’s rejected our legislation, he has the responsibility to tell the American people how many more years does he expect us to stay. Do you think it will be five, maybe 10? … Wishful thinking, political talking points and rigid ideology do not make good foreign policy.”

more insideIn fact, until he accidentally entered the political spotlight in August of 2004, almost nobody outside of his National Guard unit and students, parents and teachers at Mankato West High School had ever heard of him. It was then that Republican operatives tried to exclude him from a George W. Bush rally in a quarry north of Mankato. The news of the attempted rejection hit the evening news on local CBS affiliate KEYC and settled into a comfortable spot in the pages of the Mankato Free Press the next morning. Later, the story was picked up by Nick Coleman of the Minneapolis Star Tribune, and from there it spread through the blogosphere.

Now it’s 2-1/2 years later and Rep. Walz is taking at least one page from the book of his predecessor, Gil Gutknecht: He’s issuing a periodic e-newsletter. How often he plans to put out the newsletter he hasn’t said yet

Now that the Federal Railroad Administration has told the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern railroad that it is not going to give it the hoped-for $2.3 billion loan to expand into the Powder River Basin, is that the end of a decade-long dream for the DM&E’s CEO Kevin Schieffer?

The answer is: No one knows. Schieffer at least in public has said he’s not throwing in the towel. The Surface Transportation Board and the FRA have approved the project, just not the massive loan. The Mayo Clinic and other opponents along the route haven’t scheduled any victory parties. And freshman Congressman Tim Walz, whose upset victory last fall came partially because of his opposition to the loan, is holding out an olive branch saying, yes, we want the railroad to upgrade and succeed, but no, we’re not crazy about the coal.

Ten years ago when Kevin Schieffer set off on his quest to turn the Class II DM&E into a Class I railroad, he thought he had a surefire solution: Extend his fledgling regional operation into the coal-rich PRB and begin shipping America’s last remaining supplies of relatively cheap fossil fuel to coal hungry power plants in America’s heartland. Though there were already two railroad lines servicing the area, his new route would be shorter and more direct to points east. It sounded like a can’t-fail plan.

more insideYet he didn’t anticipate the opposition that would arise along the way from a vast and diverse myriad of interests. Despite this opposition he kept pushing forward, but partially because of the opposition the project grew more expensive. Would-be investors started to get nervous. So Schieffer turned to his old friend John Thune, a newly elected senator from South Dakota, for help. Thune obliged by adding a last-minute provision into the massive 2005 Transportation Bill that would all but assure the DM&E of a low-interest, taxpayer guaranteed federal loan that would cover about 35% of the cost. It seemed like a slam dunk.

Citizens, the media and all but a handful of legislators didn’t find out about this provision until after the behemoth bill was passed. Soon the media were trumpeting the DM&E PRB expansion project as a done deal: You can’t fight both the railroad and Congress.

But they forgot to ask a few folks along the way. While the environmental opposition had faded away after a series of Surface Transportation Board decisions favoring the railroad that were upheld in court, there was still strong opposition from ranchers in Wyoming, citizens in Brookings, S.D., and above all, the Mayo Clinic and the City of Rochester, Minn. The latter two, which had been fighting the expansion quietly for years, suddenly swung into full combat mode, pulling out all the stops

more inside

One would think that it would be a cold day in hell or a consistently 70º Minnesota winter to see newly elected Minnesota Reps. Tim Walz and Michele Bachmann cosponsoring the same piece of legislation. The same is true with veteran Minnesota Reps. Betty McCollum and John Kline, as arguably the four names represent the broadest possible spread of political perspective among Minnesota’s House delegation.

But wait. There’s more! Minnesota’s Republican Sen. Norm Coleman and his Democratic counterpart, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, are introducing companion legislation in the upper house of Congress.

more insideAh, you think, it’s gotta be one of those non-controversial bills calling for some monument or honoring a famous Minnesotan’s birthday, legislation that would pass by unanimous consent. Those slip through Congress like prunes through a toddler all the time.

But there’s more! Two other sponsors of the House bill are Democrat Mark Udall and Republican Marilyn Musgrave of Colorado, veterans like Kline and McCollum and politically as opposite. What gives?

Three letters: DM&E.

All eight, plus five more members of the House, are cosponsoring legislation aimed at derailing one of the largest proposed pork deals in the country’s history, a $2.3 billion taxpayer-guaranteed, collateral-free loan for the DM&E, a small Midwestern railroad, so that it can compete as a coal hauler with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific railroads. This is ten times the cost of the ill-fated bridge-to-nowhere in Alaska.

South Dakota Sen. John Thune, a former lobbyist for the railroad, slipped the $2.3 billion loan provision into the Transportation Bill at the last minute nearly two years ago.

Since much has been written about this sweetheart legislative deal, I’m not going into detail here. But more information, including internal documents from the DM&E, can be found at Minnesota Monitor and Vox Verax, as well as at A Bluestem Prairie and I Don’t Hate America.

District observers credit Walz’s victory to a number of factors, including:

• His 24-year service in the Minnesota National Guard.
• His personal appeal and enthusiastic, nearly two-year long campaign.
• Voter displeasure with the war in Iraq. One of Walz’s central campaign themes was to challenge the war.
• His opposition to the proposed $2.3 billion loan for the DM&E railroad. The Mayo Clinic, the City of Rochester, Olmsted County and the Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce (normally a rock-ribbed Republican stronghold) all opposed DM&E coal trains coming through Rochester.
• TV ad support from outside groups like the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and VoteVets.org.
• Critical last-minute support from the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
• Solid grassroots support.
  
• Gutknecht’s early overconfidence in victory.

While there are other reasons for Walz’s success, Republicans are hoping that the two key issues that turned the tide for him

• Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Energy and Research
• Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management

House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

• Subcommittee on Highways and Transit
• Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials
• Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management

House Committee on Veterans Affairs

• Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

These are all committees that have a direct relationship to his district and his interests. In comparison, Walz’s predecessor, Gil Gutknecht, was a member of the following committees in his last term of office:

House Committee on Agriculture

• Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Dairy, Nutrition, and Forestry
• Subcommittee on Specialty Crops and Foreign Agriculture Programs

  House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

• Subcommittee on Government Management, Finance, and Accountability
• Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy and Human Resources

  House Committee on Science and Technology

• Subcommittee on Research
• Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards

Rep. Gutknecht did a good job on the Agriculture Committee, but over the last six years the latter two committees have been hamstrung by politics, global warming denial and religious belief posing as science. Hence, their performance was lackluster at best, and there’s no record of Mr. Gutknecht having distinguished himself on either.

Congressman Walz seems to have jumped into his congressional duties with the same fervor that he showed on the campaign trail. That’s good for his constituents. Let’s hope that his drive will create positive results in terms of policy changes and legislation. That will be even better for his constituents.