Dog Days

Now there are just too many ways you can go with this story.

"Jane Balogh said she registered the Australian shepherd-terrier mix to vote in protest of a 2005 state voter-registration law that she says makes it too easy for noncitizens to vote.
She put her phone bill in Duncan's name, then used the phone bill as identification to register him as a voter."

Now what Jane did IS wrong....regardless of her reasoning for doing so. There is no excusing what she did and to her credit, she is not trying to do so.

"Balogh said she doesn't plan to contest the charge because "I know I'm guilty." She said she submitted ballots in the dog's name in the September and November 2006 and May 2007 elections. She wrote "VOID" on the ballots and didn't cast any votes."

However, the fact that Duncan was sent 3 absentee ballots is pretty stunning. What is even more stunning is the reaction of the elections office.

"The elections office says the system is designed to catch fraud in voting, not the registration process."

Now by using the elections offices logic, there should not even be a prosecution. After all, Duncan didn't vote did he????? No harm, no foul...

Seriously, someone in the elections office needs to start smacking around a few heads and they need to START looking for (and catching) fraudulent registrations. Because those fraudulent registrations LEAD to fraudulent votes. If people can register multiple times or register their pet and their dead Aunt Sophie, what is to stop those from using those registrations to vote!

We need photo ID verification for registration and voting! The time has long since passed for that. It is not going to be an undue burden on the poor - if they are getting public assistance they have to have a photo ID so that is no excuse. The ONLY people that are "inconvenienced" by having to produce photo ID are the people who are trying to cheat the system! Something to keep in mind the next time a politician says we can't have photo IDs at the polls.

The worlds best border collie (patent pending) is actually a border collie/Australian Shepherd cross and she definately has the smarts of both breeds. If Duncan has half the smarts that most Aussies have (and the terrier part has some smarts too) he is probably a much smarter voter than most folks who have cast ballots before him. Maybe it wouldn't hurt.....

Star Tribune to Minnesota - you still aren't taxed enough!

It's a rare mid-day appearance for me today. The lines between work and home are being blurred this week due to vacations.

Last year, during the campaign season, Minnesotans were lobbied HARD to vote for a constitutional amendment that would dedicate the entire amount collected in Minnesota Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) to updating and funding our transportation infrastructure. It would (the proponents said) solve all of our transportation funding problems. The Star Tribune (shockingly) supported approval of the amendment telling the voters that this was a much needed solution to our transportation "woes". Well either the Strib's editorial writers think we have horrible memories or that we just don't pay attention because they are out today pimping the new transportation talking points issued by their friends in the DFL by claiming that our current gas tax is "too low".

"Today the state's gasoline levy, at 20 cents a gallon, is not only lower than it was in the beginning, adjusted for inflation, but also lower than it has ever been in the intervening 82 years."

When the tax proposals first came out, I asked "Were the residents of Minnesota sold a bill of goods" when the transportation amendment was foisted upon us? The way things stand now, I think that the answer is a resounding yes!

To all my dear friends who spent the last election cycle assuring me that the MVST Amendment would solve all of our transportation funding woes, I ask, are you still so sure about that?

Not what they expected.

Surprise, surprise...now that the Dems are in control of the House and the Senate, they are backing away from the crown jewel of their campaign promises.

"CHICAGO - In Washington, Democrats are blaming Republicans for the Senate's failure so far to vote on a resolution opposing a troop increase in Iraq.
But in the heartland, some voters say such excuses no longer are good enough.
Having banked on the promise that Democrats would force a change of course in Iraq if they won control of Congress, some of the people who helped the Democrats get there are growing impatient.
They're frustrated that Democrats sank so much energy into a nonbinding resolution then dropped the bipartisan plan of Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., like a hot potato when Republican leaders who support President Bush maneuvered them into a corner. "

"They're being overly cautious, to the point of really not accomplishing anything," said Lisa Rone, a psychiatrist from Oak Park, Ill. "I thought the Democrats would be much more clear about that vote and be much more active." "

Of course, if you ask Senator Harry Reid...

"I think the American public's very satisfied with what's happening," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "We're on the right side of the angels here."

They couldn't get their weak "non-binding" resolutions passed, they couldn't get Rep Murtha's "slow bleed" plan even into committee and even here in Minnesota, the Dems are backing away from their promises to their base. They realize that if they keep those promises, their days in power are limited!

Welcome to the club guys. Now you know how the Republican base feels.