Saturday, October 28, 2006

State Auditor

There are only two you should consider in this race (unless you believe that the Taxpayer's League and MCCL should run this position): Dave Berger and Lucy Gerold

Dave Berger

Single payer health care, equal rights, Green Audit

The Green Audit is something that Minnesota should be championing. By promoting ecological wisdom we reduce harm to future generations on our lands. By purchasing products that promote fair trade and reduce poverty, we can improve the lives of many others in this world. Economic security globally would greatly reduce physical security needs locally.








Lucy Gerold

( taken from her site):

No office in state government has as its main job to pay attention to local government - except the Auditor. Unfortunately, traditional auditors have used that role only to call press conferences to highlight mistakes or misdeeds. We should expect more for our money. The best auditors use their access to information as a tool to actually improve the performance of local governments. 60% of all governmental resources in Minnesota are managed by local governments. To deliver better results, we must do it with - not in spite of - our towns, cities, counties, and school districts.

Lucy Gerold is a change maker with a track record of turning around organizations and inspiring outstanding performance. She has worked in the Minneapolis Police Department in several capacities, including in her current role as a Deputy Chief. She led the implementation of the department's pioneering CODEFOR crime reduction and accountability strategies. In the 1980's she was at the forefront of the city's transformation to community-oriented policing - moving police officers out their traditional reactive role into a more proactive, partnership-based relationship with the community they serve. We need this same kind of transformation in the relationship between the state and local governments - a relationship that has become strained if not outright hostile in the past few years.

-

I think it fair to end with Dave's comments on the Auditor race:


Pat Anderson and Rebecca Otto have been supportive of the Minnesota Taxpayers League’s legislative agenda. Ms. Anderson has signed this special interest group's "no new taxes" pledge. Ms. Otto states that the Taxpayers League is a "special interest group funded by wealthy conservatives" and that this "Special interest group has taken control of Minnesota Finances" (see her website at www.rebeccaotto.com/Vision/mnfinances.html). As with her views and actions on equal rights, these unkind words do not match her actions. While in the State Legislature Ms. Otto had the highest rated Taxpayers League voting record of any DFL House member in 2003 . She now claims she is against this special interest yet she voted with them 55 percent of the time in a year when the average Democrat voted with this group a mere 17 percent of the time! While Ms. Otto desperately wants to paint herself as a progressive to solidify her base within the DFL, she has a great deal in common with the politics of the conservative Ms. Anderson. In addition, at least on these two issues, Ms. Otto states one thing and does another. Integrity and consistency is an important part of public service.


Both Pat Anderson and Rebecca Otto have received thousands of dollars of special interest PAC money for their campaigns (see the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board website ). Dave Berger does not accept PAC money. Such special interest money has an undue influence on candidates. Especially State Auditor candidates. "The State Auditor must be objective," states Dave Berger. "How can you be an effective and fair State Auditor if you support special interest groups and do not believe in equal rights and equal treatment for
everyone?"

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dave Berger's comments paint an inaccurate picture. He doesn't say that this year, liberal democrat state rep Michael Paymar got a 55% rating from the Taxpayer's League, the same as Otto's "score," or that Dave Berger himself was in 100% agreement with the Taxpayer's League on the stadium issue and so would have scored favorably as well. Rebecca Otto happened to oppose expansion of state-run gambling and the profile of learning, and so did the Taxpayer's League. That's not a bad thing. Candidates have no control over how a group chooses to rate them in retrospect. But anyone who visits Otto's site or has followed her work will know she's been the leading opponent of the Taxpayer's League's "no new taxes" agenda that has done so much harm to our communities around the state, and that has driven property taxes up to historic heights, caused library closings (Pat Anderson, a pledge signer, called libraries "non-essential" and targeted them for cuts), that has caused soaring tuition, and forced schools to beg for levies just to fund the basics. Rebecca Otto has fought all that and more.

Anonymous said...

Dave Berger doesn't say that this year, liberal democratic state rep Michael Paymar got a 55% rating from the Taxpayer's League, the same as Otto's, or that Dave Berger himself was in 100% agreement with the Taxpayer's League on the stadium issue and so would have scored favorably as well. If you look it up on their site you'll see the reason for the scores: Rebecca Otto happened to oppose expansion of state-run gambling and the profile of learning, and so did the Taxpayer's League. That's not a bad thing. Candidates have no control over how a group chooses to rate them in retrospect. But anyone who visits Otto's site or has followed her will know she's been the leading opponent of the Taxpayer's League's "no new taxes" agenda that has done so much harm to our communities around the state, and that has driven property taxes up to historic heights, caused library closings (Pat Anderson, a pledge signer, called libraries "non-essential" and targeted them for cuts), that has caused soaring tuition, and forced schools to beg for levies just to fund the basics. Rebecca Otto has fought all that and more. Plus she actually walks the talk on the environment, by living in a wind-powered solar house and driving a hybrid car and teaching about environmental issues. She's endorsed by Cleanwater Action and by by Stonewall DFL and has GLBT support. Last time arch-conservative Pat Anderson won by 0.70%. Dave Berger got 3.67% Think about it.

Kevin Chavis said...

I appreciate you for your comment!

While Stonewall DFL did endorse her, Otto still voted for the Bachmann amendment. It makes Stonewall look like they don't believe in accountability, and are solely an organization that wishes to elect Democrats and not push for GLBT rights.

Your last comment does make a point - for IRV. Democrats assume Greens will vote for them, if we had IRV they might do so.

But do you know how many registered Democrats plan to vote for Pawlenty? Around 7%. If Democrats spent as much energy getting their own party to vote for them, as they do creating political barriers for Greens, perhaps they would win more?

source: http://www.surveyusa.com/

Anonymous said...

To be fair, I've read elsewhere that Otto did say on TV before her election that she regretted that vote, a comment that may have cost her the election in the district she shared with Bachmann as Senator. You are right about IRV and I think Otto is listed as a supporter of that somewhere. Anyway I think she's a good person and she would be there for progressives if elected, which would be a refreshing change from the super-conservative Anderson. And I believe until we have IRV, at the end of the day that's the choice.