Legalectric

Fair Use stolen from STrib - this photo captures Sviggum’s essence!

As reported across Minnesota -

In STrib:

Sviggum named labor, industry Commissioner

In St.PPP:

Veteran legislator Sviggum named head of Labor and Industry

Associated Press on Minnesota Public Radio:

Sviggum to leave House, appointed Labor Commissioner

Winona Daily News:

Sviggum to leave House; date for special election uncertain 

The Gov’s Press Release:

Gov. Palwenty appoints Sviggum Labor and Industry Commissioner

… and from the MPR page (it may be radio, but they consistently manage to capture these guys as they are! Remember that Micheletti photo???)

Here’s the most recent Overland photo of him, from the Candidate Forum in Zumbrota just before the last election:

Last but not least, here’s Sviggum with his toady Ray Cox (stolen from Ray’s site). Steve’s the guy who as Speaker sent letters threatening felony charges for serving pie and popsicles at public events, grossly misinterpreting campaign law. Ray was a benefactor of the pie letter, but in the end, Sviggum and Cox had pie on their faces:

Looking for a demonstration of his judgment and character? Check this! Is this the kind of guy we want as Commissioner of Labor and Industry?

Legislative Blue Books?

10:53 UPDATE TO UPDATE TO UPDATE TO UPDATE:  Mark says that distribution of the Legislative Blue Book is proscribed by statute, and that legislators, the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate each got “a few hundred each.”

Clerk of the House: (651) 296-2314
Secretary of the Senate: (651) 296-0271

10:31 UPDATE TO UPDATE TO UPDATE: RITCHIE TO THE RESCUE, TWO COPIES ON THE WAY!!! RESPONSIVENESS IN GOVERNMENT PERSONIFIED!!!! THANK YOU!!!! I appreciate not having to try to wrangle ANYTHING out of Sen. Steve Murphy! Please order more!
10: 28 UPDATE TO UPDATE: He’s back, saying that if I’d asked for hard copies, they’re out. Um, yes, exactly, that’s what I’m complaining about…

================================

10:19 UPDATE: Now THAT’S responsiveness in government. Just 14 minutes, 14, after I fired off my missive to Mark, he responds personally that there are some, and “How many would you like?”

=======================================

Oh, I’m having one of those “Overland” moments. I am one of the thousands who got this Ritchie blurb in my inbox, also through the CD2 list. And I read it! Part of the blurb said that the Legislative Manual, affectionately known as the “Blue Book,” distinct from “Mao’s little Green book,” has just been released.

I want a hard copy of the Legislative Manual. It’s one of those books I want in arm’s reach from the phone and computer.

ONLINE VERSION OF LEGISLATIVE MANUAL

The phone number listed on the state’s legislative manual link provided is (651) 215-1440.
So I call, and was told that THEY ARE OUT AND THERE ARE NO MORE ON ORDER. HUH??? Supposedly, our legislators are given a certain number of copies to distribute. WHAT? Only the “Student” edition is available, and to get one, you have to send a self-addressed stamped envelope, and the guy couldn’t even tell me how much postage was necessary. WTF?

The “Blue Book” is one of those things that is essential to those new to politics and civic participation, and even seasoned and grizzled pitbulls need one on hand for reference. THEY ARE OUT AND THERE ARE NO MORE ON ORDER!!!

It’s as bad as when the Senate decided they were not going to have paper copies of bills anymore.

It’s probably one of those things that Ritchie inherited, but he’s now the Secretary of State, the guy on the hook to fix it. Call (651) 215-1440 to get a copy and write to Mark Ritchie at secretary.state@state.mn.us and let him know that we need the Blue Book!

Government of the people, by the people, and for the people? Uh-huh… right…

The best news I’ve had lately is that Komanoff is back at it and laying out the essential differences between “Cap & TRADE” (BAD) and “Cap& TAX” (GOOD). He gets it — do you?? Here’s the Carbon Tax site. More on this soon.
I was just indulging in a little Komanoff in the tub (Power Plant Cost Escalation) and found this snippet that rings so true about coal gasification and the spiraling out of sight costs — and in dealing with those promoting IGCC when they haven’t a clue what they’re talking about. The cost estimates for IGCC are way off for the same reasons that was an issue in nuclear — we’re stuck in the 70’s folks, overbuilding, trying to get approval for capacity we don’t need, and on the brink getting mired in Dogawful messes:

The failure to predict accurately nuclear capital costs reflects a fundamental limiation in the power industry’s technique of engineering estimation, which employs conceptual plant designs to calculate the labor, materials, equipment, and engineering effort to build a plant. The technique requires that the scope of work be known at the start of construction, yet nuclear plants, as the larges reactor builder has noted, are subject to “new requirements… imposed after the design and construction are well advanced, requiring substantial rework that increases both the schedule and cost.

Yeah, DUH, but the cost estimates are so far off, and it’s only going to get worse if they actually try to build one of these fool things somewhere. Substitute IGCC for nuclear and there you have it! How many “lessons learned” at Wabash River? How many full-time engineers does it take to cobble Wabash together?

I can’t get over the aspects shared by nuclear of the 70’s and coal of 2006. We really don’t need to do this all over again.

Pawlenty shoveling it at MN Soybean Growers biodiesel plant - stolen from Ag Innovation News

First, a little background. The Midwest Ag Energy Network Summit was the handiwork of the Joyce Foundation funded Great Plains Institute. The Great Plains Institute, as you may recall, have their “Coal Work Group” to promote coal gasification, and their junkets for coal gasification in 2003 and 2005.

And so you’ve got Gov. Pawlenty introducing his “Next Generation Energy Initiative” at the same time that the Great Plains Institute is delivering its propaganda about … well, take a guess:

Energy for the Next Generation

A great meal with a huge side of IGCC propaganda. Surprise, surprise, in the Coal part of the meeting, they deliver a rah-rah coal gasification, and at the Brookings meeting, thankfully there was a Russian present who had worked on coal gasification and knew they didn’t have a clue what they were talking about and knew they had no business presenting it as a panacea. Funny how that works. But the problem is that at these Great Plains Institute “Town Hall Meetings” where they SAY they want input from the public, well, they really don’t, and they’re pushing that coal gasification agenda without regard for the actual costs and environmental detriment of IGCC, oh, but wait… remember that Joyce Foundation funding? What did they get that $$$ for? Oh, yeah:

Great Plains Institute for Sustainable Development
Minneapolis, MN $437,500
To support the efforts of its Coal Gasification Working Group. (21 mos.)

PROMOTION OF COAL GASIFICATION. $427,500 buys a few junkets to Europe, a few Town Meetings (Spirit Lake, Iowa tonight) and an Ag Energy Summit or two… and here they are promotiing it, and haven’t incorporated the information from Mesaba that shows that not only is it $6.38/kWh WITHOUT capture and sequestration, but that the overnight cost is $3,259/kW, ummmm… hello, earth to mars, this doesn’t sound like a good idea. So be sure to check out the “Center for Climate Strategies” promotion of coal gasification — search the doings in the states listed, and you’ll see IGCC — not in MY state!!!
… and so anyway, now there’s Pawlenty and his “Next Generation Energy Initiative” and it makes me wonder if there are naming rights for the Gov’s policy packages, sort of like the way there are with legislation, i.e., C-BED the legislation and C-BED the Crocker entity that puts up a different front on the C-BED website.
Pawlenty and Coal Gasification — rumor has it he has said that under the terms of his Next Generation Energy Initiative, Excelsior’s Mesaba project may have to be “grandfathered in.” Oh, so then if that’s the case, doesn’t that mean that the Mesaba Project defacto does not produce the benefits that they’re touting? If it has to be “grandfathered in,” what’s the point? Hmmmmm…. somebody better check that out at the public hearings next week, eh?

Excelsior’s Mesaba Project is contrary to the basic points of Pawlenty’s plan, which focuses on more renewables, increase conservation, and aggressive cuts to CO2 emissions. The Mesaba Project isn’t renewable, it’s construction generation and making Xcel buy electricity it doesn’t need and that we don’t need, and each year it spews over 6,300,000 tons of CO2 into the air.
Somebody better let Pawlenty know that the Excelsior Project isn’t a happenin’ thang… and clue him in on the political consequences of association with this boondoggle… if you have any doubts, just check the Mesaba Project Siting Docket. zzzzzzzzzzzz, shhhhh, don’t wake it up!

———————————————-

GOVERNOR PAWLENTY INTRODUCES NEXT GENERATION ENERGY INITIATIVE
– December 12, 2006

Governor Pawlenty today announced his Next Generation Energy Initiative that will result in more renewable energy, more energy conservation, and less carbon emissions for Minnesota.

In an address to the Midwest Ag Energy Network Summit today in St. Paul, the Governor outlined his proposals that will build on Minnesotaâ??s nation-leading per capita renewable fuel use, while increasing energy cost saving measures and developing a sound approach to emissions.

More Renewables

In his remarks today, the Governor announced his proposal to move the state closer to his 25xâ??25 strategic goal - 25% of all types of our energy will come from renewable sources by 2025.

* Expand and improve the stateâ??s Renewable Energy Objective (REO)
Under the current REO, Minnesota electric utilities to are expected to generate at least 10% of the electricity they supply consumers to come from renewable resources by 2015. Governor Pawlenty is proposing that the REO increase to 25% of the electricity Minnesotans use should come from renewable resources by 2025. In addition, a financial penalty for non-compliance would be imposed if the goal is not reached.

â??The obligation should be firm enough to ensure we reach our goals, but flexible enough to allow utilities and regulators to respond to changing markets, consumer demand and regulatory conditions,â? Governor Pawlenty said.

* E85 Everywhere
To continue Minnesotaâ??s leadership in E85, Governor Pawlenty is proposing the E85 Everywhere program which would quintuple the number of E85 pumps in the state by 2010, an increase from 300 now to 1800 in four years. In addition, the Governorâ??s proposal will help retail station owners with grants to partially offset the cost of E85 pump installations.
* Promote the development of cellulosic ethanol and advanced biomass technologies in Minnesota
Financial resources should be available to assist and encourage the growth of Next Generation biofuels, such as cellulosic ethanol, and advanced bio-gas (gasification of biomass) technologies to offset natural gas use in the state, with a special focus on farmer ownership.

â??I believe this will be Minnesotaâ??s next bio-energy home run,â? Governor Pawlenty said.

More Energy Conservation

â??We have among the nationâ??s best conservation and energy efficiency programs in the country. We can build on this success and save significantly more energy in the coming years,â? Governor Pawlenty said. â??Energy conservation saves Minnesotans real money on their energy costs, while reducing the environmental impacts of our energy use.â?

* Reduce Minnesotaâ??s fossil fuel energy use
Governor Pawlenty set an aggressive energy saving goal for Minnesotans to reduce use of fossil-fuel energy by 15% by 2015. The Governor said that the goal is achievable through increases in energy efficiency and renewable resources.
* Transition the Conservation Improvement Program (CIP) from a spending requirement program to â??energy savedâ? program
The amount of electricity and natural gas we save each year can be significantly increased through additional energy efficiency and conservation measures. Governor Pawlenty is proposing to change Minnesotaâ??s utility energy conservation program from a spending program to an energy savings program and by requiring utilities to reduce their retail sales by 1.5% annually.

â??We should also increase the accountability and transparency of utility conservation activities,â? Governor Pawlenty said. â??Together, these reforms will effectively double the amount of electricity we save and increase natural gas savings by 50%.â?

* Set as a goal of 1,000 Energy Star commercial buildings in the state by 2010
Currently, Minnesota has 87 schools, office buildings, and churches that have received the Energy Star award. Governor Pawlenty is proposing that 1,000 building become Energy Star certified throughout the state.

â??More Energy Star rated buildings will save money, improve the environment and make working in them more enjoyable,â? Governor Pawlenty said.

Less Carbon Emissions

â??Our global climate is warming, at least in part due to the energy sources we use,â? Governor Pawlenty said. â??Minnesotans did not create this problem, nor can we solve it by ourselves, we need an effective national and international effort. That said, we should identify and take a number of reasonable and fair steps that will reduce our greenhouse gas emission, just as we did with our nation-leading mercury emissions reduction legislation.â?

* Establish stakeholder process
Governor Pawlenty is inviting the nationally recognized Center for Climate Strategies to Minnesota to conduct a wide-ranging and inclusive stakeholder process and to develop a plan to aggressively reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Minnesota over the coming years.
* Utility offset
â??Minnesotaâ??s electric utilities should prepare for the future by offsetting carbon emissions from new fossil-fuel generation sources,â? Governor Pawlenty said. â??As we look to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, we should not make the situation worse while we try to make it better.â?
* Climate Exchange
Governor Pawlenty is proposing that the State of Minnesota join the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) or some other national registry that will helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions from state operations. The CCX is a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission registry, reduction and trading system. Members make a voluntary but legally binding commitment to reduce GHG emissions.

â??The Next Generation Energy Initiative provides the pathway to that better energy future,â? Governor Pawlenty said. â??Taking these steps will be good for the environment, good for rural economies, good for national security, and good for consumers.â?

—————————————

The test question: Who put together the Chicago Climate Exchange? Who benefits from commodification of CO2 and its trade in this market?

Bonus question: How does trading a) shift emissions and b) reduce emissions?

Frank Wright sent a heads up — here’s the Winona Daily News article:

Lanesboro residents file Campaign Finance complaint against Davids

… and it’s not the first time Davids had campaign finance violations. See “Greg Davids’ Failed Damage Control.”

Here’s the CFBoard’s finding in 2004.

Here’s Greg Davids’ 2005 Campaign Finance Report - and remember 2005 is an off year. He didn’t sign at the bottom of p. 5 where he has to certify that the report is true. Check this:

$35,495.47 spent on “non-campaign” expenses
$ 5,072.30 spent on “campaign” expenses
$43,826.61 Off-year spending, including above plus “other”

What is he spending it on?

“Constituent services - pens, business card magnets”
“Constituent services - phones (three companies’ bills)(how to tell campaign v. constituent?)”
“Constituent services - out of district mileage” which is issue in Complaint - what is this?
“Parking at Capitol 2005 - $582″ Isn’t that what Dog gives him a “per diem” for?
“Delos Computer Solutions” is double-billed, same day, same amount, as campaign and non-campaign expense
“Lockridge, Grindahl, Nauen - Meeting Expense $200,00″ That’s the lobbying firm Christian Sande works for! Is Davids paying that lobbying firm to organize meetings for him? Or organize fundraisers for lobbyists to contribute to him? What is this?
“Public Utilities Commission - office utilities” all non-campaign expense?
“Office rent @ $300/mo” non-campaign expense — all of it?
$3,000+ of “other” and it’s all non-itemized expense?
And look at all the “Suggestion Solicitation” items under “non-campaign” expense — that’s the primary thing he was busted for in the CFBoard Order above!

Yeah, I’d have questions too… Thanks to Peggy Hanson, Frank Wright and Harlan Taylor for holding Davids’ accountable.