Secretary of State Mark Ritchie employing intimidation tactics in an attempt to suppress investigation of voter registration irregularities.

Yesterday afternoon Secretary of State Mark Ritchie called a press conference alleging that Jean Sanford, a volunteer with Minnesota Majority, had inappropriately contacted a voter representing herself as working with the Secretary of State. Secretary Ritchie further asserted that the volunteer from Minnesota Majority was engaged in voter intimidation tactics.

"The complaint is completely frivolous and Mark Ritchie knows it," said Jeff Davis, President of Minnesota Majority.  In a sworn affidavit given today by Jean Sanford, she contradicts the voter's complaint.  Sanford said that she never represented herself as being associated with the Secretary of State.

“Jean is a sweet little grandma who is passionate about transparency in elections,” said Davis, “The voter’s own sworn statement indicates that he found Mrs. Sanford to be very kind. I can’t imagine how anyone could be intimidated by this lady.” Minnesota Majority believes that the voter, above all else, was concerned by the amount of information that is maintained on Minnesota’s public voter registration records.

"Mark Ritchie's actions are simply a ruse to deflect attention away from the real issue at hand – the obvious problems with Minnesota’s voter registration records," said Davis.  Minnesota Majority has been investigating apparent irregularities in the Secretary of State’s voter registration records for several days and has uncovered a large number of anomalies including: 

• POTENTIAL DUPLICATE VOTER REGISTRATION RECORDS: A total of 16,578 exact voter registration record matches using the criteria of first name, middle name, last name and birth year. When phone number is used instead of middle name as a matching criterion, there are a total of 488 matching records.
• VACANT AND NON-DELIVERABLE ADDRESSES: A total of 29,006 voters have a voter registration address which is flagged as being “vacant” by the United States Postal Service. A total of 62,822 voters list an address which is flagged as being “non-deliverable” by the Postal Service.
• DEFICIENT VOTER REGISTRATIONS DUE TO MISSING BIRTH YEAR: There are a total of 1,695 voter registrations with registration dates after August 1, 1983 when birth date was required by law.
• VOTER REGISTERING BEFORE THE AGE OF 18: Over 1,800 records have a voter registration date and a birth year that suggests the voter registered before the age of 18 years of age (some before they were born).
• VOTERS POTENTIALLY CASTING MORE THAN ONE BALLOT IN A SINGLE ELECTION: 76 cases in which it appears that a single voter may have cast more than one ballot, with thousands of additional records which merit additional review.

Volunteers have been researching these apparent discrepancies by taking photographs of vacant lots at addresses listed on voter registrations and telephoning individuals who appear to have duplicate voter registration records.  When contacting people by phone, volunteers give people their name, identify themselves as being with Minnesota Majority and ask the individual to verify their address.

Minnesota Majority suspects that Secretary of State Ritchie may be trying to use the power of his office to suppress further investigation. "The citizens of Minnesota should be very concerned when a public official exploits the power of his office to attack a private citizen who is simply trying to ask questions," said Davis.  "We are not deterred by Secretary of State Ritchie’s tactics. We have not done anything wrong. No one should be intimidated by our research, unless of course an individual was contemplating committing voter fraud." 

Minnesota Majority's attorney has submitted a letter to Mr. Ritchie asking him to immediately present all evidence pertaining to the false allegations.  Legal counsel is also exploring what, if any, improprieties may have been committed by Mr. Ritchie or members of his office in the process of bringing this complaint.

While nearly every Twin Cities media outlet was happy to report on Ritchie's false allegations on Wednesday, only a few media outlets attended today's press conference to get Minnesota Majority's side of the story (kudos to the Star Tribune for being one of the few that actually published a story). 

TAKE ACTION:  Contact Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and tell him what you think about his actions.  Write a letter to the editor and let them know what you think about the media's obvious bias in covering this story.

• POTENTIAL DUPLICATE VOTER REGISTRATION RECORDS: We found 261,000 records that have an exact duplicate match on the criteria of first name, last name and birth year. When middle names are included as a matching criterion, there are a total of 16,578 matched records. We found 488 registrations that matched on first and last names, year of birth and phone numbers.
• VACANT AND NON-DELIVERABLE ADDRESSES: A total of 29,006 voters have a voter registration address that is listed as “vacant” by the United States Postal Service. 2,977 of these vacant addresses are multi-unit housing, such as apartments. A total of 62,822 voters list an address that the post office indicates is “non-deliverable.” Our ongoing investigation into these suspect addresses has revealed that many of them simply do not exist. Photos showing vacant and non-existent addresses appearing on Minnesota voter roles have been presented to the media.
• DEFICIENT VOTER REGISTRATIONS DUE TO MISSING BIRTH YEAR: Minnesota Statute 201.071 requires voter registrations recorded after August 1, 1983 to include a birth year. A total of 1,695 voter registrations with registration dates after August 1, 1983 have missing birth years. By law, these voters should not be eligible to vote until they provide this correct identifying information.
• POTENTIAL DECEASED VOTERS: 3,689 voters in just Hennepin and Anoka Counties reported as deceased by the Social Security Administration remain on the voter rolls. According to the secretary of state’s office, these deceased voters will not be removed from the rolls unless they fail to vote in two consecutive elections. Because Minnesota doesn’t require photo ID to vote, anyone could walk into the polls on Election Day and claim to be one of these deceased voters to obtain a fraudulent ballot. As long as the deceased person continues to cast ballots, this can go on, unchecked in perpetuity.
• SUSPECT BIRTH YEARS: Voter registrations completed before 1983 didn’t require a date of birth, which is astonishing enough in its own right, being that there is a minimum age requirement of 18 to vote. Registrations completed after 1983 require a date of birth, but we found 1,695 such registrations on the rolls missing this information, and 2,106 voters who are over 100 (924 over 108 years old and 78 over 118 years old).
• VOTERS THAT MAY HAVE CAST MORE THAN ONE BALLOT IN A SINGLE ELECTION: We identified 13,340 potential cases of a single voter casting more than one ballot in past elections. We reduced that list to 100 records as a test sample for closer scrutiny and discovered a strong correlation which compelled us to forward these records to the 30 county attorneys in which these voters are registered. Individuals who knowingly cast multiple ballots could be found guilty of a felony under Minnesota Statute 204C.14.

While there may be rational explanations for many of these apparent inconsistencies, no one appears to be investigating these situations to make this determination. So far, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie appears to be dismissive of these findings.

Minnesota Majority’s findings are based upon a June 30, 2008 version of the voter file. There have been at least an additional 100,000 new registrations added to the file since that time. Almost half of these new registrations were submitted by ACORN, the organization which is under investigation for voter registration irregularities and improprieties in at least 13 states.

Secretary of State Mark Ritchie tried to assure Minnesota voters that his administration makes use of a sophisticated address validation process that involves mailing a postcard to new registrants.  But since he has taken office, there have been 4,051 new registrations or re-registrations that the Postal Service indicates have non-deliverable addresses.

Minnesota Majority has repeatedly urged the Secretary of State run a comprehensive crosscheck on the entire voter file prior to the November election, using records from the United States Postal Service, the Department of Public Safety and the Social Security Administration. Inconsistent records should be flagged so that local election judges can be notified of voters that should be screened. There are nearly 1,700 voters who, by law, should not be allowed to vote until they have updated their voter registration records providing missing dates of birth.  There are potentially thousands of additional deficient voter registrations due to invalid addresses or potential duplicate voter registrations. These voters should be required to verify their eligibility before casting a ballot this November.

There’s no more important job to be done by the Secretary of State than to ensure the integrity of our election process. There isn’t much time left until the election, but the simple steps we have recommended to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie could easily be implemented before the 2008 general election. Minnesota Majority has urged Secretary Ritchie to take immediate action so that voters will not call into question the integrity of our election process after the fact.

As yet, Secretary of State Ritchie has not offered any plan of action to ensure that the potential problems we have discovered do not taint this year's election.

TAKE ACTION: Contact Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and ask him to complete a comprehensive verification of Minnesota's voter file prior to this year's election. 

Yesterday, October 21, Minnesota Majority finally received an official written reply to our October 16 letter to the Secretary of State regarding inconsistencies we discovered in the state's voter file. We found the letter, authored by Deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann, to be dismissive of our concerns. For example, Mr. Gelbmann claimed not to understand what we meant by the definition of a "vacant" address.  He also said the Secretary of State does not remove deceased individuals from active voter rolls until at least two elections cycles have passed in which the individual did not vote.  Are they concerned about disenfranchising dead voters? 

Today Minnesota Majority responded to the Deputy's letter by submitting a second letter requesting a comprehensive validation of the Minnesota voter file.  In our second letter we included the results of additional analysis which suggests that there may be thousands of duplicate voter registration records on the voter file and possible instances of voter fraud.

TAKE ACTION:  Contact Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and ask him to complete a comprehensive verification of Minnesota's voter file prior to this year's election.

Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie held a press conference at the Capitol today to attempt to answer some of the questions raised by Minnesota Majority about the integrity of the voter registration file. He was joined by several county election officials who stood united in the message that Minnesota’s election system is unblemished.

While some of the questions raised by Minnesota Majority’s research were addressed, not all were adequately answered by the Secretary of State. He did indicate that new procedures are being put in place to better safeguard the integrity of the election system.

Election officials from several counties claimed that they have had few or no issues with questionable registrations. In case of a suspect registration, election officials are supposed to refer the registration to the county attorneys for investigation. Ramsey County has referred a total of 16 suspect registrations in recent months. The other county officials claimed either 1 such referral, or none.

It was suggested that some of the suspect voter registrations may have come from ACORN.

On the large number of voters found in the system who were over 100 years of age, Ritchie explained that before 1984, birth dates weren’t required to register to vote and that an arbitrary birth date was assigned to any voters without one listed in the records. He says the year chosen was 1900.

Questions remain unanswered about the large number of registrations claiming either unoccupied or nonexistent addresses. Ritchie alluded to the possibility that some of this could be explained by homelessness, or by new developments not showing up in the United States Postal Service yet.

Minnesota Majority’s analysis of the data is ongoing.

Minnesota Majority delivered a letter to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie today, asking him to immediately respond to the findings of an analysis of the voter file recently completed by the organization. The analysis identified many inconsistent and suspicious records within the file, including thousands of new registrants that voted in past elections, thousands of voters over 100 years of age and thousands of voters residing at vacant addresses.

The findings of Minnesota Majority’s research raise serious concerns about the integrity of Minnesota’s voter file. While there may be plausible explanations for some or all of the apparent inconsistencies, these findings should warrant a complete and comprehensive verification of voter records.

This comes at a time when there are voter registration problems surfacing across the nation. Last week U.S. District Judge George C. Smith ruled that Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner must perform verification required by the Help America Vote Act. That includes matching new registrants' information against information in databases maintained by the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles or the Social Security Administration.

A copy of the letter to Secretary of State Mark Ritchie together with the findings of the analysis project are available here.

There may have been a time when a voter could confidently know that a Democrat would stand for one thing and a Republican another, but that certainly isn’t the case anymore. Former Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman spoke on Senator John McCain’s behalf at the Republican National Convention. Republican Senator Norm Coleman was a Democrat as mayor of St. Paul. Even conservative Republican icon Ronald Reagan was once a Democrat. Minnesota Majority’s 2007-2008 Legislative Scorecard ranked some House Republicans lower than some Democrats on traditional values issues. That’s why it’s more important than ever to know where the candidates stand and be prepared to vote based on principles instead of just blind party loyalty.

To help voters understand where the candidates stand on the issues, Minnesota Majority launched a new election awareness campaign called “Vote Your Values Minnesota”. The campaign was introduced with a new metro-area billboard featuring an undecided voter facing a choice between party and principle. The billboard directs people to the website, VoteYourValuesMN.org which includes a collection of resources to assist voters get informed this election season. Visitors to the site will find their legislators’ voting record, tools to find their polling place, getting registered to vote and information about the candidates on the ballot in their district among other things. A number of competitive House races are also spotlighted with side-by-side candidate comparisons on a variety of traditional values issues.

Minnesota Majority has prepared a one of the most comprehensive legislative scorecards available that assesses how well incumbents have represented "traditional values" positions on the issues in the state legislature. We tracked over 40 votes during the 2007-2008 legislative sessions, spanning a wide range of issues including taxes, government spending, parental rights, property rights, health care, education and energy policy. In many ways, these votes represent the front-line in the battle to defend traditional values in Minnesota’s public policy.

Five legislators earned a perfect 100% score and were our top “Heroes”.

The Heroes
Bruce Anderson District 19A 100%	Mark Buesgens District 35B 100%	Tom Emmer District 19B 100%	Steve Drazkowski District 28B 100%	Kurt Zellers District 32B 100%

 An additional 23 House members receive an honorable mention for supporting “traditional values” positions 90% of the time or better.

Honorable Mentions
Tom Hackbarth, District 48A, 98% Mary Holberg, District 36A, 98% Mark Olson, District 16B, 98% Ron Shimanski, District 18A, 98% Michael Beard, District 35A, 98% Laura Brod, District 25A, 95% Matt Dean, District 52B, 95% Chris DeLaForest, District 49A, 95% Bob Dettmer, District 52A, 95% Rob Eastlund, District 17A, 95% Sondra Erickson, District 16A, 95% Paul Kohls, District 34A, 95%	Marty Seifert, District 21A, 95% Brad Finstad, District 21B, 94% Steve Gottwalt, District 15A, 93% Torrey Westrom, District 11A, 93% Dan Severson, District 14A, 93% Joyce Peppin, District 32A, 93% Joe Hoppe, District 34B, 93% Pat Garofalo, District 36B, 90% Erik Paulsen, District 42B, 90% Dean Simpson, District 10B, 90% Steve Sviggum, District 28B, 90%

On the opposite side of the fence we have our “Zeros” – legislators who more often than not voted against the interests of everyday Minnesotans. Instead, these House members supported policies that would raise your taxes, expand government and reduce your freedoms. A total of 9 House members were perfect “Zeros”.  

The Zeros
Margaret Kelliher District 60A 0%	Willy Dominguez District 58B 0%	Frank Hornstein District 60B 0%	Carlos Mariani District 65B 0%	Cy Thao  District 65A 0%
Alice Hausman District 66B 0%	Neva Walker District 61B 0%	Sheldon Johnson District 67B 0%	Karen Clark District 61A 0%

 An additional 18 members receive a “dishonorable mention" for scoring 5% or less.

Dishonorable Mentions
Erin Murphy, District 64A, 5% Diane Loeffler, District 59A, 5% Carolyn Laine, District 50A, 5% Melissa Hortman, District 47B, 5% Bill Hilty, District 8A, 5% Mindy Greiling, District 54A, 5% Kathy Brynaert, District 23B, 5% David Bly, District 25B, 5% Jean Wagenius, District 62B, 2%	Tom Tillberry, District 51B, 2% Linda Slocum, District 63B, 2% Mike Nelson, District 46A, 2% Joe Mullery, District 58A, 2% Tim Mahoney, District 67A, 2% Phyllis Kahn, District 59B, 2% Mike Jaros, District 07B, 2% Jim Davnie, District 62A, 2% Lyndon Carlson, District 45B, 2%

TAKE ACTION:  See how your state representative scored by visiting our vote tracking page and enter your zip code at the top of the page.  Contact your legislator and tell him or her how you feel about their score. Help spread the word by distributing copies of our Heroes and Zeros Flyer and a hardcopy version of our Legislative Scorecard in your neighborhood.

It was a low turn out at the primary election this year. Early estimates indicated 15% or lower overall turnout, but there were some pretty interesting races.

Override Sixer, Neil Peterson was shut out of the general election by GOP Endorsed candidate Jan Schneider in 41B (Edina).

On the flip side, unendorsed incumbent Jim Abeler (another sixer) came out on top against political newcomer Don Huizenga by a comfortable margin in 48B (Anoka). There was no endorsed Republican at all in that race.

Speaker of the House Margaret Kelliher takes Abeler’s win as a sign that suburban voters don’t oppose a higher gas tax, and went on to push the envelope saying, "It tells us when we can lay out a case for why we need a constitutionally dedicated gas tax ... the public is going to respond to that."

Incumbent DFLer Willie Dominguez was upset by primary challenger Bobby Joe Champion in 58B (Minneapolis). You can’t beat that name.

House District 7B had five candidates vying for the DFL spot. Roger Reinert came out on top of the heap, but it was a squeaker. Marshall Sternsen trailed by just 28 votes.

John Kappler defeated challenger Mady Reiter for the GOP spot in 53A (Anoka). Reiter ran a strong campaign but still came in behind Kappler, 1103-638.

Endorsed Republican candidate Tom Effertz was upset by challenger Julie Johnson in a tight race in 54B (Shoreview area).

Conservative Maplewood mayor Diana Longrie made a run for the DFL ballot position in 55A, but came in second to Leon Lille in the three-way Democrat primary race.

Eccentric liberal DFLer Phyllis Kahn faced a strong challenge for her ballot position from Joel Rainville, but managed to pull out a commanding win in 59B (Minneapolis).

In St. Paul, there were two GOP primary races. Mark Roosevelt defeated Lucky Rosenbloom in 66B and Meg Ferber came out ahead of Sharon Anderson in 64A.

Former candidate for Minnesota’s Attorney General, Jeff Johnson handily secured a ballot spot in Hennepin County’s 7th Commissioner District, taking 56% of the vote. He’ll face runner up Joan Molenaar (26%) in the general election. Johnson's strong showing in the primary bodes well for his general election battle.

Endorsed Republican Mark Olson was defeated by Allison Krueger, a candidate who promised not to campaign if she wasn’t endorsed. Despite not campaigning, an intense effort by the Senate Republican Caucus and other activists concerned about Olson’s viability due to some family issues ushered Krueger into the Republican slot on the ballot in Senate District 16.

The Supreme Court races have boiled down to Tim Tinglestad vs. Paul Anderson for the 3rd seat and Lorie Gildea vs. Deborah Hedlund for the 4th.

You can view all the primary election results online at the Secretary of State’s website.

Primary Elections are on Tuesday September 9^th. Polls open at 7:00 Am and close at 8:00 PM.

Primary elections are unfortunately shunned by the majority of the electorate, with only about 25% of eligible voters getting out to vote. This year’s primary features some interesting races, though. Most notably are probably the couple primary battles that erupted in the aftermath of the so-called "override six." Six Republican legislators broke ranks and voted with House Democrats to override the governor’s veto of a massive $6.6 billion tax hike. Several lost their party’s endorsement.

In District 48B, Jim Abeler was not endorsed by his party. Neither was challenger Don Huizenga, with delegates unable to reach the 60% threshold one way or the other, they voted for no endorsement. This leaves Abeler to defend his override vote against Huizenga in the primary.

The Edina area produced two Republican lawmakers who sided with Democrats on the transportation bill veto override. Ron Erhardt of District 41A who was denied endorsement in favor of Keith Downey. Erhardt will run as an independent, dodging a primary challenge. Neil Peterson in 41B also lost his party’s endorsement over the override but is running in the primary against endorsed candidate Jan Schneider.

Eccentric ultra-liberal Phyllis Kahn, the frequent butt of talk radio jokes faces a primary challenge in 59B. The 18 term legislator, noted for seeking funds for street lighting that "preserves the natural night environment," pushing an astroturf study and perennially introduceing a bill to lower the voting age to 16 will face politically well-connected Joel Rainville.

First term liberal legislator Willie Dominguez faces a challenge from attorney Bobby Joe Champion in 58B.

Senator Norm Coleman and DFL endorsed Senate candidate Al Franken both have primaries to contend with, but Coleman’s lone primary opponent is fugitive dentist turned sex-criminal and accused arsonist Jack Shepard who now resides in Italy. Franken makes some in his party nervous and has five challengers for the DFL ballot slot. Priscilla Lord Faris began running a strong campaign, but seems to have dropped off.

Of course, other important primary contests are going to unfold all across the state. Even if the other races don’t have as much sizzle, they are still just as important. Make sure you make it to the polls and support the conservative candidates in your district’s primary. We can’t vote for the best candidates in November if they don’t make it onto the ballot on Tuesday.

Take Action: Check the Poll Finder to learn where you vote in your precinct and don’t forget to get out and cast your ballot.

Join Minnesota Majority at the Conservative Issues Fair on Saturday, September 20 at the Bloomington Airport Hilton (near the Mall of America) from 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.

Stop by our booth and meet talk radio host Dan Conry. Pick-up free newsletters, yard signs and bumper stickers. We’ll also have the popular GlobalClimateScam.com light bulb T-shirts for sale (discounted from web site prices).

The event features speakers including conservative talk host, Jason Lewis, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (6th District), Barb Davis White (5th Congressional District candidate), Congressman John Kline (2nd District) and Ed Matthews (4th Congressional District candidate). Breakfast with Michele Bachmann is served from 7:00 – 9:00 for those who want to arrive early and Lunch with Barb Davis White runs from 10:00 – Noon.

Numerous conservative organizations will be in attendance, including Center for Parental Responsibility, Citizens Council on Health Care, the College Republicans, Minnesota Federation of Republican Women, Minnesotans Seeking Immigration Reform, Taxpayer’s League of Minnesota, TCRA (the organizaers) and many others. This is a fantastic opportunity to meet the people behind all of these great conservative organizations, pick up information and other materials and discuss the issues of the day. If you are a conservative who has been looking for a way to get more involved, this is the ultimate event at which to do so. Whatever your top issues are, this event should have you covered and Leadership Institute will be conducting a workshop for activists throughout the day.

Admission is just $5.00. Hope to see you at the Fair!

A new poll conducted by MPR and the Humphrey Institute finds that an overwhelming majority of Minnesotans oppose the new sales tax increase constitutional amendment that will be on the ballot this November. The poll surveyed people likely to vote in the 2008 election and found 72% opposed to the amendment, which would increase the state’s sales tax by 3/8% to fund "the arts and outdoors." Just 22% support the measure, with 6% undecided.

The proposed constitutional amendment is the final touch on a legislative session that was characterized by tax hikes, borrowing and budget expansion. The measure will require approval by the voters this fall. Based on the results of the MPR/Humphrey Institute survey, passage doesn’t appear likely at this point, but there is a concerted effort underway to promote the amendment. 200 environmental and arts organizations are pushing the tax hike with their "Vote Yes" campaign which launched in May.

The ballot question reads "Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide funding beginning July 1, 2009, to restore, preserve, and enhance the state's fish and wildlife habitat and other natural resources; to protect the state's drinking water sources; to protect and restore the state's lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands and groundwater; to support the state's parks and trails; and to support the arts and cultural heritage of the state by increasing the sales and use tax rate by three-eighths of one percent on taxable sales until the year 2034?"

Details on the proposed use of revenues collected by the new tax can be found in the bill (HF2285) but the basic breakdown is (at minimums) 25% of the new revenue is dedicated to a natural heritage fund, 25% to a clean water fund, 15% to a parks and trails fund, 15% to a "sustainable drinking water" fund and 10% would go to an arts and cultural heritage fund. The remaining pot would get divvied up by the whims of the legislature.

The 200 organizations pushing for the amendment’s passage this fall are a laundry list of arts and environmental groups with their hands out. They are seeking constitutionally dedicated funding streams on the backs of already overburdened Minnesota taxpayers. 72% reject the notion, saying these organizations and services should be paid from existing revenues and individuals.

Former senator Rod Grams summarized the Vote Yes coalition, saying, "They want to tack on a new tax, by a group of special interests that want to pick the pockets of Minnesota taxpayers, to create a slush fund to enable them to spend monies on their pet projects,"

Take Action: Use our letter to the editor tool to send your opinion on the tax hike to your local newspaper.

Prices at the pump remain at record highs and Minnesota Majority has joined the chorus of demands for Congress to act. With soaring fuel prices and increasing demand, it’s well past time Congress listens to the American people and begins to dismantle the road blocks Congress itself put in place to obstruct access to our own abundant natural resources.  Despite the rhetoric coming from our elected officials about easing the pain at the pump, energy independence and taking the strain off of family budgets, our congressional leaders have done nothing to reverse the problems created largely by congressional policy.

Lately it seems that our representatives in Washington are all political spin versus taking meaningful action. Excuses and blame are elevated to a high art form in modern beltway politics. Some of the myths perpetrated by congressional leaders by way of defending their grossly irresponsible inaction on American energy issues have made their way into the mainstream consciousness.  One of the biggest myths about expanding access to American oil reserves is that it wouldn’t make any noticeable difference. Opponents of abundant American energy claim that even if ANWR and the outer continental shelf were opened up for drilling, the oil wouldn’t enter the market for ten or more years and the effect on fuel prices would be negligible or nonexistent.

Another common meme is that oil investors speculating on future scarcity are the driving force behind high prices. These two notions cannot harmoniously coexist. If speculation on future scarcity is driving up the price of oil, how can it be that future abundance wouldn’t bring prices down? The truth of the matter is that oil speculators are cashing in on high prices, but they can only do so because supply is artificially limited by congressional policy. It’s the restrictions on accessing domestic oil that creates the scarcity. Immediately following the president’s announcement that he was lifting the executive ban on offshore drilling, gas prices began to drop, because it became that much more likely that supply would be increased. The closer we get to tapping more of our own resources, the more the price will fall, before a drill bit even touches the ground in expanded access sites.

Defenders of do-nothing policy are also fond of parroting the notion that oil companies aren’t using the leases they already have. Supposedly, after paying hundreds of millions of dollars in rent, and investing in equipment and exploration, Shell is sitting on thousands of idle acres of leased land where they could be producing oil. Again, it’s a game of deflecting blame and the easy target is big bad oil companies. This is simply not true. And with oil prices at an all time high, it doesn’t make sense, either. If Shell could get all this supposedly untapped oil out to market, they’d stand to make even bigger profits than they already are. Buy low. Sell high. Simple market economics dispels this myth, but some additional facts may bring more clarity. The Interior Department’s Mineral Management Service reports that there are 7,457 active leases for oil drilling. Of those, 1,877 are classified as producing. That doesn’t mean oil isn’t flowing out of the remaining 5,580, or that drilling and exploration isn’t underway at those sites. To be deemed producing, a site must be producing 130,000 barrels of oil per day. It takes time to ramp an operation up to that capacity, and the process is underway on all leased sites with known deposits of oil.

The argument that lifting the drilling ban wouldn’t have any effect for a decade is false, but even were it true, it’s a ridiculous, short-sighted argument. Using their own premise, if we’d lifted the ban ten years ago, we’d have that oil today and wouldn’t be in such a dire energy crunch now and ten years from now, we’ll still need oil.

A couple incidents that occurred decades ago have lived long in the American psyche. One is the 1979 Three-Mile Island nuclear reactor partial core melt-down. That incident unfortunately happened just a few weeks after the release of The China Syndrome, a disaster movie about a nuclear power plant melting down. This helped usher in a ban on new nuclear power plants. A new one hasn’t been constructed in the US since while France and the rest of the world leap ahead of us in nuclear technology. The other incident was an oil spill caused by an offshore rig back in 1969.

When offshore oil rigs were new technology, operators didn’t have a grasp on the environmental hazards posed by bringing up oil from beneath the ocean floor. An accidental spill resulted in 80,000 barrels of oil washing up on the coast of Santa Barbara. Everyone has seen the footage – probably more than once. That was just about forty years ago, and thanks to advances in technology and safety protocols, such a disaster hasn’t happened since. Regardless, the myth persists that offshore drilling is environmentally destructive. The truth is modern oil rigs are equipped with automatic shut-off valves beneath the ocean floor. Should an accident or damage to the rig occur, the oil in the well is safely capped off so virtually none escapes into the seas. There are backup protocols as well and oil companies are required to constantly rehearse and demonstrate competence in containing any possible oil spill.

These are some of the myths being used as excuses to do nothing that would truly increase domestic oil supplies. There is a strong element in our society and in our government that wants gasoline to be prohibitively expensive. They envision a carbon-free solar and wind powered utopia of extreme conservation among the masses. Affordable, abundant energy such as is needed to power our homes and our economy run counter to their vision for us. Excuses are useless. Americans need leaders who will act, and act in the best interests of their constituents. The American economy is the most productive in the world and the engine of that economy needs fuel. Someday we may be powering our factories and automobiles with hydrogen or another kind of energy, but the truth is right now, we need petroleum. We have it. It’s time for Congress to let us go get it.

Take Action. Tell Congress to cut the excuses and increase domestic oil production by signing the ActNowOnEnergy.com petition and sending a direct message to your elected officials.

Saturday, September 20^th, The Conservative Issues Fair will take place at the Bloomington Airport Hilton (by the Mall of America) from 10:00 – 4:00. This event will feature speakers including popular conservative talk host, Jason Lewis, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (6^th District), Barb Davis White (5^th Congressional District candidate), Congressman John Kline (2^nd District) and Ed Matthews (4^th Congressional District candidate).

Breakfast with Michele Bachmann is served from 7:00 – 9:00 for those who want to arrive early and Lunch with Barb Davis White runs from 10:00 – Noon.

Numerous conservative organizations will be showcased at the fair, including Minnesota Majority, Center for Parental Responsibility, Citizens Council on Health Care, the College Republicans, Minnesota Federation of Republican Women, Minnesotans Seeking Immigration Reform, Taxpayer’s League of Minnesota, the Twin Cities Republican Association and many others. This is a fantastic opportunity to meet the people behind all of these great conservative organizations, pick up information and other materials and discuss the issues of the day.

Minnesota Majority will be distributing free GlobalClimateScam.com yard signs and bumper stickers along with copies of our newsletter and other literature at this issues fair.

If you are a conservative who has been looking for a way to get more involved, this is the ultimate event at which to do so. Whatever your top issues are, this event should have you covered and Leadership Institute will be conducting a workshop for activists throughout the day.

Admission is only $5.00 Minnesota Majority will see you at the Conservative Issues Fair.

Lawmakers, reluctant to take action to reverse the trend of increasing energy scarcity have been feeling the pressure from their constituents and, for the sake of political survival are compelled to act on energy. The driving force has been a plan called the "American Energy Act," an "all of the above" plan to increase domestic production and supply of all kinds of energy. Everything from petroleum to nuclear power was addressed in the bill. Speaker Pelosi and her anti-energy cohorts in the House pulled the plug on debate when it became obvious that they were on the losing side of the argument.

Since adjourning for a five-week vacation instead of addressing the sharply rising cost of energy in the United States, Congressmen have been feeling the heat from angry constituents demanding they get back to work and do something about American energy.

Since abundant, affordable energy runs contrary to their agenda, this puts some lawmakers in a bit of a pickle. Their careers could be on the line if they don’t act, and act quickly, but taking action could upset their future plans.

The new "gang of ten" has ridden in on white horses to save the day with the "New Energy Reform Act." This plan, cooked up by 5 Senate Republicans and 5 Senate Democrats (Conrad D-ND, Chambliss R-GA, Thune R-SD, Graham R-SC, Lincoln D-AR, Landrieu D-LA, Isakson R-GA, Corker R-TN, Pryor D-AR, and Nelson D-NE) is supposed to be the compromise between boosters of abundant American energy and those who wish to restrict the flow of energy.

How can there be a compromise between parties, who on one side want more energy while the other side wants less? The only possible middle ground would be to keep things they way they are. This New Energy Reform Act isn’t even a middle-ground compromise, though. The plan will be presented as a way to increase domestic drilling for oil, something the vast majority of US citizens favor, but in reality, this so-called "reform" is so packed with stipulations and regulations as to make it nearly impossible to meaningfully increase domestic oil exploration and drilling. Throw in a whole slew of new taxes on energy producers, more mandates for "alternative" and "renewable" energy sources and what you really get is what the anti-energy crowd wanted all along: Less energy at higher prices.

So now, Pelosi and her followers have a bill they can say is an energy bill that includes domestic drilling. When Congress gets back from it’s 5-week vacation, they can get behind this bill, and hold it up to their constituents as proof that they listened and are doing something about America’s energy problems, but it’s nothing more than the old bait and switch trick. The "New Energy Reform Act" (also called the "New Era" bill) is the same tired old tax and regulate liberal politics with a name that implies something it isn’t.

Highlights from the New Energy Reform Act include new taxes and regulations on energy producers, converting cars and trucks to non-oil fuels, carbon mitigation and sequestration, more biofuel subsidies and conservation initiatives.

More progress could actually be made if Congress did nothing, rather than enact the "New Energy Reform Act." As it now stands, the Congressional ban on offshore drilling expires in October. They will have to pass a bill to continue the ban. The president could veto such a bill and offshore drilling could begin. Were this "New Era" bill enacted, most US coastal waters would actually be permanently off-limits for drilling in statute. Only a narrowly defined portion of potential drill sites would be opened, and under such stringent regulations that any actual drilling on a meaningful scale is unlikely. Add to that at least $84 billion in new taxes on energy production and somehow the equation is supposed to equal more energy at lower costs?

Don’t confuse real reform like the "American Energy Act" with it’s doppelganger surrogate. The "New Energy Reform Act" may actually be worse than doing nothing.

Take Action: Contact your elected officials and tell them not to be fooled by the "New Energy Reform Act" / "New Era" bill and to support real solutions like the "American Energy Act."

Take Action: Help us spread the word on the American Energy Act by contributing toward air time for our radio ad campaign.

Many lawmakers were ready to vote for the American Energy Act (H.R. 6566), a bill that would have expanded access to all of America’s energy options and bring relief at the gas pump, the grocery store and on home energy bills.

But Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, fearing that her agenda of restricting America’s energy supply would be upset should this bill come to a vote on the House floor, turned off the lights and went home. Rather than debate what has become a serious problem for many American families, Pelosi and her anti-energy cohorts abruptly adjourned session.  It should outrage most Minnesotans that a majority of Minnesota's Congressional delegation voted to adjourn session rather than address America's energy crisis (click here to see how Minnesota Representatives voted).

When pro-energy lawmakers refused to leave the House chamber and continued to debate the issue, Speaker Pelosi ordered the lights, microphones and cameras turned off in an attempt to stifle the popular pro-energy message being espoused.  Despite the darkness, and lack of CSPAN coverage, many lawmakers remained in the chamber and pitched their energy plan to tourists or whoever happened to come through the chambers. These determined congress men and women have remained at this vigil for days, calling on Speaker Pelosi to reconvene session or for the President to force Congress back to work on the energy problem by calling a special session.

Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, who represents Minnesota’s 6^th District, is one of the lawmakers who voted against adjourning. Of expanding oil drilling into ANWR, she recently said, "Currently, the U.S. is the only country in the world that discourages using its own energy resources. Our country imports 10 billion barrels of crude oil every day. And we are importing 1.3 million barrels of refined gasoline. Having toured Alaska, I've seen the infrastructure that is already built and pipeline that is not even at full capacity, and no wildlife at all is being harmed."  Bachmann believes in an "all of the above" energy policy that would include increased domestic oil production, developing new energy technologies, conservation and terrestrial (nuclear) power.

Pelosi's anti-energy agenda was exposed in a recent interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News.  Pelosi, who upon becoming speaker had promised a fair open debate process that would allow the minority party to present their alternatives, now says she will not allow a vote on the Energy Act to come to the House floor. "They’ll have to use their imagination as to how they can get a vote," she said of Republican lawmakers attempting to have their bill heard. Pelosi says she’s saving the planet by stonewalling on energy policy, stating her "flagship issue" is global warming.  Pelosi said, "We have to take this one step at a time, but why we're spending all this time on a parliamentary tactic when nothing less is at stake than the planet, the air we breathe, our children breathe?"

Pelosi suggests a solution for gas prices would be for the President to release oil from the strategic petroleum reserves, a stockpile of about 775 million barrels of oil set aside for military use in case of national emergencies. Selling off 100 million barrels of the reserve has the potential to reduce the price of crude by about $12 per barrel (currently about $125 per barrel). This reduction would last for all of three months and then leave us in the same boat we are now in with no new oil supply, continued rising prices and with the added bonus of a reduced strategic reserve that would cost even more to replenish.

Meanwhile, a group of nearly 50 House members remain at the capitol with a message of "Pelosi, we’re here. Where are you?"  Speaking from the darkened House chamber, Representative Jean Schmidt of Ohio said, "Pelosi is on a book tour, God bless her, she wrote a book. I wish I could take the time to write a book. Well now is the time to vote, not the time to write a book."

RSC Chairman Jeb Hensarling observed, "Speaker Pelosi says that we need to "use our imagination" for her to allow a vote for more American energy. Well, I’ve got a wake-up call for her. Americans shouldn’t have to imagine their summer vacations, they should be able to take them. Americans shouldn’t have to imagine their commute to work, they should be able to afford it. And in the greatest deliberative body in history, the peoples’ Representatives shouldn’t have to imagine a vote for more American energy, they should have a right to it."

Congressman John Kline, who represents Minnesota’s 2^nd Congressional District is among the lawmakers lingering in the House chamber demanding a vote on energy solutions. "We should not be on a five-week paid vacation when Americans are pumping their paychecks into the gas pumps," Congressman Kline said. "We are going to continue to insist that House Democrat Leadership bring Congress back so we can find a meaningful solution that includes domestic drilling to help Americans deal with rising gas and energy prices."

Two people have the power to reconvene Congress at this point. One is Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is dead set against allowing a vote on this issue which she holds the minority opinion on, and which she knows could be politically damaging to her cohorts. The other is President Bush, who has indicated that he will not call a special session to force Congress to deal with this important issue.

Take Action. Tell Congress to support the American Energy Act by signing the petition and sending a message to your elected officials.

Click here to see how Minnesota's delegation voted on adjourning.

July 4^th, 2007, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi declared the first "Energy Independence Day." We’ve since moved further as a nation from the stated goal of energy independence, but that’s beside the point. 

Independence Day is the most uniquely American holiday, and its significance shouldn’t be lost in discussion of gas prices. To be sure high costs were part of what brought about the American Revolution, but it was high taxes imposed by the English crown, and meddling in the colonies’ ability to conduct free trade that created such tremendous unrest.

Independence in the states marked a turn away from tyranny that sent reverberations throughout the world. Self-governance had never been successfully implemented before the United States of America charted a new course with our American Experiment.

Our tiny nation of rugged individualists threw off the shackles of the most powerful empire in the world and became the shining city on the hill, setting an example of freedom and prosperity that other nations of the world envied and soon emulated to large and small degrees. Isn’t that enough for one day? Should such a momentous occasion have to share it’s day, and lose its meaning in the shuffle of current events to a subversively similarly named "Energy Independence Day?"

We tend to fill up at the pump and pay higher than usual prices for gas to take road trips to family cabins or other fun summer destinations for Independence Day weekend, so we feel the pinch on this day, perhaps more keenly than on many others, but that’s not even close to what the 4^th of July represents. 

Freedom is mankind's greatest accomplishment. Still in it's infancy and often threatened, we would do well to mark this day by remembrance of the sacrifices required to secure a freedom too easliy taken for granted and the value of defending it.

Lest we be drawn down a familiar path of the slow erosion of tradition, history and meanings, below is posted the reason for John Adams’ suggestion that Independence Day "ought be commemorated as the day of deliverance, by solemn acts of devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward for evermore."

In Congress, July 4^th, 1776 

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America 

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.