This is a case about what bystanders can do when law enforcement and paramedics are acting in a public scene. The arc of court decisions has supported videoing as part of the public’s right to know, to watch and to even protest what the government does. However videoing changes the accountability of a situation. Whereas a single witness’s testimony would have had a hard time being accepted over a law enforcement’s officer’s testimony, a video changes the balance of that. The public has had to accept being videoed in public situations. Now law enforcement is slowly making that same adjustment.

Andrew Henderson video recorded an incident involving a man at his apartment building Oct. 30, when Ramsey County sheriff’s deputy Jacqueline Muellner took his camera. Unknown to the Deputy Muellner, Henderson also was also doing sound recording on another device. No charges were filed. Then the next day, Henderson went to pick up the camera but it was not in property room. When Andrew finally got the camera back, he found the video was missing. Andrew Henderson was later charged with obstructing a paramedic and disorderly conduct. The American Civil Liberties union (ACLU) has taken on Henderson’s case. Today was the trial on the motion to dismiss.

In a motion to dismiss, a judge must assume all of the facts in the prosecution’s favor. Only a jury can judge the value of facts. For this motion only, we assume that Henderson did do everything the complaint (prosecution) says. We assume the patient asked the paramedics to stop the videotaping. The paramedics then had to stop the medical evaluation to ask the deputies to deal with the videotaping. The deputy talked to Henderson and took the camera away. The paramedics continued their work without any further interruption.

Today, the two lawyers from each side argued if those facts met the standards of obstructing a paramedic and disorderly conduct. That means each side cites as many previous court cases as possible basically saying that number and trend of court rulings is on their side.

Kevin Riach of Fredrikson & Byron, P.A. presented the ACLU case for Henderson. Riach cited a list of cases where basically neither a public official nor a private person has a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in a public situation. A number of cases were cited to build the standard of  “physical obstruction or fighting words”, which neither has been claimed by the prosecution’s case. Riach argued that videotaping is extension of free speech which allows us to watch what government does. Free speech even allows behavior that can be defined as annoying, offending or an inconvenience.

Kevin Beck of Kelly & Lemmons presented the prosecution case for Little Canada. Beck said the case was an issue of whether someone was able to stop a medical assessment or listen in on medical information. The videotaping was hindering because the medical assessment was stopped for at least one paramedic had to deal with the video taping.

Judge Wilson then asked an interesting question: if Henderson had been doing the same thing without a video camera, just standing and listening, then would he still be obstructing a paramedic and doing disorderly conduct? I did not hear the answer. This clearly went to the root of question, is the video camera the real issue here. Beck then explained that video was worse because it was instantly available to the world.

I think the judge will look at whether the case meets the standards for obstructing a paramedic and doing disorderly conduct under an assumption that all facts in the complaint are in the prosecutions favor as if Henderson was watching instead of videotaping. Then the judge will decide if video taping is an extension of watching under the first amendment.

The participants will find out by email from the judge if the case is dismissed. Note that judges tend to lean towards letting a jury decide unless the case is very clear.

Rep. John Kline (R-MN) authored a student loan bill that increases college loan costs for students. Instead of Stafford loans capped at 3.4%, students will pay 8.5%. His bill could force students into taking variable rate loans that could balloon.
 
In other words, this bill would be bad for students and good for his buddies in the student loan shark sector.
 
Obama and the Democrats want to tie loan rates to a student’s income. Furthermore, they want to guarantee low loan rates.
 

First, the bill would not guarantee low rates for today’s students. A rate that continues to vary after the loan has already been taken out would create uncertainty and lessen transparency for students and their families who are making decisions about borrowing for college. Second, the bill’s changes would impose the largest interest rate increases on low- and middle-income students and families who struggle most to afford a college education. Third, the bill does not include the President’s proposal to extend repayment options to borrowers who have already left school and often face the same debt burdens as current and future students. Finally, the Administration believes that student loan interest rates should not be raised to reduce the deficit.
(Daily Kos)

More details below the fold …

 

Democrats came out in strong opposition to Kline’s legislation. Some argued that the bill’s inclusion of variable rates could be harmful to students in the long run because they would be unaware of their total loan cost when they borrowed. “The true cost is … buyer beware,” said Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), who offered an amendment that would extend current student loan rates for another two years. He and other Democrats hoped that would give the committee more time to come up with a comprehensive reform package on student loans, but the amendment ultimately failed.
 
Federal student loan interest rates are set to double on July 1, from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent, costing students on average an extra $1,000 on their loans. Unlike the House plan, Obama’s proposal would tie repayment of student loans to the borrower’s income.
 
A four-year student would have to repay $26,403 under current law, compared with $27,459 under Kline’s legislation. The Congressional Budget Office found that the legislation would net $4 billion over 10 years, which fueled Democratic speculation that the bill’s goal was to help pay down the deficit.
 
Under Kline’s legislation, Stafford loan interest rates would be capped at 8.5 percent, while PLUS loan interest rates would be capped at 10.5 percent.

and repaying the school robbery shift and bullying
 
Yesterday, I reviewed Minnesota’s 2013 legislative session from a rosy, more positive perspective. Today I’ll look at what we didn’t achieve and should have.
 
So as you read this, remember that the marriage equality win was epic. Also remember that we’ve stopped the government in crisis bull**** that the Republicans got us into while investing in moving our state forward.
 
Minimum Wage
 
At one point it looked like the Legislature might raise their own pay before dealing with the minimum wage. That would have been a huge mistake. Instead, they passed a constitutional amendment on the 2014 ballot to create a citizen panel to review legislator pay.
 
In the end, the DFL Senate couldn’t agree with the DFL House on what MN’s minimum wage should be. The House thought $9 per hour, the Senate $7.75. Neither is really all that great. $10 per hour would have been decent.
 
Why did the Senate fail? Did the fraidy-Dems bring forward fears about reelection? Or repackaged bull**** Republican talking points?
 

Guns
 
Simply stated, the NRA and their stooges won. The DFL leadership simply didn’t push hard enough on this.
 
Did marriage equality take up too much bandwidth? Maybe. But I thought that the DFL was able to walk and chew gum at the same time.
 
School Shift
 
The Republicans stole money from schools that the legislature had already promised. School districts had already spent that money. Republicans used that money to cover the structural deficit that a decade of their fiscal negligence caused.
 
So it’s not really cool that we didn’t pay that back.
 
I get it that we’ve fully funded our education system, but it’s kind of like telling a kid your sorry the bully stole her/his allowance and that you’ll be increasing his/her allowance but you won’t be returning the money the bully stole.
 
Bullying
 
The anti-bullying bill, the Safe and Supportive Schools Act, would have brought Minnesota’s vague standards up to par with the rest of the country. Republicans threatened a filibuster and won because time was on their side. We simply didn’t have enough time left in the session and we had other items to pass before the session ended.
 
Thankfully, protecting LGBT kids from bullying will be a top priority next spring. We have too many kids suffering from bullying and too many administrators complying with our current standards who are unaware of the suffering.
 

Has embattled Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) finally jumped the shark? Has she finally done something or said something so crazy, so unhinged that even serious journalists in Minnesota’s media might even notice?
 
Possibly.
 
Bachmann claimed that a miracle will occur and that this time (the 37th time) repealing Obamacare will work!
 

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

She appeared on James Dobson’s right wing radio show. Dobson founded Focus on the Family and is one of the old white men who call the shots in the evangelical christianist movement in America. Dobson fed her a softball question to get her talking about how the IRS would start denying conservatives healthcare.
 

Bachmann replied that concerns such as this were exactly why it is so important to repeal Obamacare, which will miraculously happen before the end of Obama’s term when he is compelled to sign and “repudiate own signature piece of legislation” through an act of God:
 

 

That’s why you saw the House of Representatives pass my bill, the full repeal of Obamacare last week, and that’s why I have renewed confidence that we can see this bill pass in the Senate and I think the President will ultimately be forced to repudiate his own signature piece of legislation because the American people will demand it.
 
And I think before his second term is over, we’re going to see a miracle before our eyes, I believe God is going to answer our prayers and we’ll be freed from the yoke of Obamacare. I believe that’s going to happen and we saw step one last week with the repeal of Obamacare in the House. We have two more steps. We serve a mighty God and I believe it can happen.

The real question is will any of Minnesota’s media step up on this? I’m not insane and I don’t expect Minnesota’s media to step up and begin covering what Bachmann says and does. Apparently, they are only capable of covering her ethics scandal.
 
Why should they report this?
 
She has clearly admitted that this time, the 37th time, it’s going to be different. Why will it be different this time? Because God will cause a miracle to happen so that the Senate will pass a similar repeal and Obama will sign it.
 
She has no evidence. Not that facts or evidence have ever mattered before.
 
But she has never fallen so clearly and tightly into a widely accepted definition of insanity before.
 
The Senate is controlled by the Democrats and despite being led by the pusillanimous and weak-willed Harry Reid, I can’t see him giving a repeal bill a hearing. Furthermore, I can’t see Obama wanting to repeal his legacy bill.
 
Here’s another definition of insanity.
 

in·san·i·ty [in-san-i-tee]
noun, plural in·san·i·ties.

1. the condition of being insane; a derangement of the mind. Synonyms: dementia, lunacy, madness, craziness, mania, aberration.
2. Law. such unsoundness of mind as frees one from legal responsibility, as for committing a crime, or as signals one’s lack of legal capacity, as for entering into a contractual agreement.
3. Psychiatry. (formerly) psychosis.
4. 1. extreme foolishness; folly; senselessness; foolhardiness: Trying to drive through that traffic would be pure insanity.
   2. a foolish or senseless action, policy, statement, etc.: We’ve heard decades of insanities in our political discourse.

when this landed in my mailbox this morning, my immediate response was — “it’s gotta be satire…”
 

Michele Bachmann was the muse for a new romance novel called Fires of Siberia, to be published June 1, about a fiery presidential candidate who tries to bone up on her foreign policy credentials only to get stuck in the wilderness with a sexy stranger. “Inspired by the life of Tea Party leader and Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, Fires of Siberia (by author Trey Sager) is an old-fashioned bodice ripper romance that brings the heat for the 2013 summer beach reading season,” touts publisher Badlands Unlimited.

 
gotta be satire… but the source for the story is the Atlantic Wire — and they wouldn’t steer us wrong, would they?
 
At first I thought the author’s name (“Trey Sager”) was a pun in french. (‘tres sage’ is a french expression signifying ‘very wise’ or ‘very well-behaved.’) but a friend sent a photo of mr. sager. and the atlantic’s reporter pointed to other works by the same author, and suggested that his publisher is legit…
 
…and at the same time told us that this bachmann romance novel “might not be so much a sexy romance inspired by a plucky congresswoman as a political book in a funny format.” i don’t think the atlantic can have it both ways: if they make all the proper phone calls to check it out and look at all the facts–they should print their conclusion (sincere attempt at a bodice ripper or political satire?) and share that conclusion with the public. the atlantic is supposed to function as ‘a global village explainer.’ if they want to fudge their explanations, there’s no reason to read them.

i came down squarely on ‘satire’ (and not very subtle satire: the publisher’s an ‘art press,’ one of their other titles is an examination of marcel duchamp, and they claim they publish “ebooks “Because you can’t publish a .GIF on paper.”) it’s important to hold the press accountable when it comes to reporting these distinctions (between satire and reality.)
 
especially in this case, because the story of bachmann’s actual career and conduct is already over the top of reality. professional journalists should avoid adding to reader confusion regarding ‘what does/does not exist’ in her malice in wonderland narrative. it bugs me that this atlantic story may leave people of good will with the wrong impression. (it reminds me of previous occasions: eg, someone puts up an item about michele getting drunk and slipping in her own vomit, and it turns out to be an unfunny hoax at the expense of the credulous–they’re the victims of the ‘joke,’ rather than michele bachmann.)
 
it’s tempting to publish any sort of item on michele bachmann, because the mere inclusion of her name in a story attracts readers (i’m told that doing marginal stories on the basis of name value, simply to attract readers, is called ‘hit-whoring.’) but if you’re a responsible publication reporting on ‘enemy of reality’ michele bachmann…
 
…you don’t ever want your readers to leave your piece wondering: what was ‘reality,’ i just read? or was that about another hoax, just more satire, just some more snark? the readers rely on you for guidance, you don’t want to mislead or patronize them.
 
nevertheless, i wish mr. sager the best of luck with this digital publication. im sure it will amuse and instruct. as the publisher notes: “reading an e-book on e-readers like the iPad or Kindle means you only have to use one hand to read, freeing your other hand to do whatever you please.”

I’m a little behind the curve on this, but I do have to weigh in.
 

Congressman Lamar Smith of Texas really does not understand science. Not scientific method, not scientific theories or laws, none of it. Which is why he submitted a bill draft titled the “High Quality Research Act” which would in effect add a politician into scientific studies.
 
The bill says that any research done using federal funds (which is the majority of research done in the United States) must have its results and finding approved by the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives. If the findings are not agreed to, the research is taken from the researchers and disposed of by Congress as it sees fit.
 
(Addicting Info)

We can talk about how many people are frightened of new knowledge that might challenge their emotionally pleasing, if unlearned, belief systems. Or about honest, if entirely irrational, suspicion of what they perceive to be deep, dark forces at work, targeting much that they hold dear. But I’m done politely avoiding the fundamental issue, here. The bottom line with these anti-science righties is that they’re just plain stupid. And it’s their own fault. The world is full of resources from which they could learn, but they choose not to use them. They’re idiots, and absolutely unfit to govern. We don’t put little kids in charge, and in many respects, “childlike” is where too many purportedly adult heads are at.
 

Smith’s bill could well get through the House, but it won’t go any further. The effects of sequestration cuts are far more serious.
 

And now that the sequester has taken effect, some of those scenarios are beginning to play out. As the Huffington Post reports, medical researchers are already scaling back their projects in areas that could have big implications for public health. At Temple University, one team of researchers hoped to develop a more effective method of repairing the heart to help Americans better recover from heart attacks — but now, thanks to the recent budget cuts, they may have to lay off staff or test a fewer number of potential therapies. Virginia Tech researchers who are studying depression, substance abuse, and post traumatic stress disorder have already been dealt a $640,000 blow to their grant funding, and are bracing for another $1 million in cuts. At the University of Kansas, the funds for behavioral research to help educators learn how to work with children with disabilities are in limbo.
 
(Think Progress)

Franken currently holds a +9 in his job approval ratings (51% approve vs. 42% disapprove) which is a solid rating for an incumbent heading into a re-election campaign.  Franken also currently holds at least a 15-point lead against any of the possible challengers polled.  Businessman Mike McFadden (the only potential candidate who has publicly expressed interest in the race) and Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek trail Franken by 15 points, while State Senator Julie Rosen trails by 16 and U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann, radio talk show host Jason Lewis, and Chanhassen’s own State Senator Julianne Ortman trail Franken by 17.

There’s not a lot of good news in the polling data for Ortman.  Ortman’s name recognition is low (80% didn’t know who she was), but among those who did know her, almost four times as many had an unfavorable opinion as had a favorable opinion.  Those numbers gave her the lowest favorability numbers among the potential candidates in the poll.  Worse, she had an unfavorable opinion among Republicans and self-identified conservatives who knew who she was.  Franken leads Ortman by 29 points among women and by four points among men (even though Franken polls -8 in job approval among men).  However, her low name recognition does give her the opportunity to introduce herself on her own terms to voters.

Numbers like these help explain why Ortman may have felt the need to take time from the end-of-session rush last week to try and blast Franken over the IRS investigations of Tea Party groups.  If she intends to run, she needs to drive name recognition and establish herself as a credible contender because based on the polling numbers and Franken’s formidable fundraising — it’s going to be an uphill battle.

After ten years of Republican destruction, budget slashing and poor management and after the epic Marriage Restriction Amendment fight, the 2013 legislative session felt like a new, fresh start for Minnesota.
 
We progressives have built many, many coalitions over the years. Many didn’t succeed, some partially blocked something bad the conservatives wanted to do. The MN United campaign and the 2012 election was the culmination, the coming together of so many different parts of the activist left. From the religious to labor to peace to … suffice to say that it’s a mighty long list.
 
Overall, how did the legislature do considering the unity we all basked in after the 2012 landslide?
 
I say pretty well.
 
Marriage equality was epic.
 
Passing a budget that fully funds education and eliminates our structural deficit by making the richest 2% pay a share closer to what the rest of us pay was huge.
 
Here a few more successes …
 

Dan McGrath, Executive Director of Take Action Minnesota points out these in an email I received:
 

A new health care exchange that puts people at the center. Ban the Box legislation that takes a step toward closing the racial jobs gap. Fairer taxation that closes corporate tax loopholes and invests in all-day kindergarten and a stronger MinnesotaCare.

$46M for early childhood gets two thumbs up from me. All day kindergarten is cool. Stable funding for education is needed. Read more at MinnPost.
 
“Finally, Minnesota is closing corporate tax loopholes instead of schools,” said Carol Nieters, Executive Director of SEIU Local 284 “It’s a much better investment for Minnesota’s future.”
 
“In a week where Minnesota celebrated equality, lawmakers showed that economic equality is important too,” Nieters continued. “It’s the right direction for Minnesota.”
 
The Dayton Administration claimed the following additional victories:
 

• Property Tax Relief for Minnesotans – Property taxes have increased by 86% statewide over the past decade, with increases falling hardest on the middle class, seniors, and small businesses. This session, we invested over $441 million in property tax relief for Minnesotans by restoring the state’s commitment to cities, counties, and school districts, and providing direct relief to homeowners and renters.

 

• A Historic Investment in Education: For the first time in its history, Minnesota will offer All-Day Kindergarten to every child in Minnesota. We are giving thousands of children access to high-quality preschool and child care. And we are freezing tuition for the next two years at the University of Minnesota and all MnSCU campuses and increasing student financial aid to make higher education more affordable for middle class families. With nearly a billion dollars in new money for education, this budget invests in every learner in Minnesota – from early education through higher education. This new funding will help give our kids access to a world-class education and train the best-educated workforce in the world. This budget will also eliminate the school shift by the end of the next biennium.

And the following for improving Minnesota’s economy:
 

A Growing Economy That Creates Middle Class Jobs
 

• Major New Investments in Job Creation. Highlighted by the Mayo Clinic Destination Medical Center, this budget contains provisions to support growth and expansion for a number of Minnesota companies. State investments in 3M, Mall of America, and Baxter International will help create tens of thousands of new jobs in Minnesota.

 

• Attracting and Retaining Businesses – By investing $30 million in the Minnesota Investment Fund, we were able to provide more competitive loans that will bring new businesses to Minnesota, help existing businesses expand, and create thousands of new jobs for Minnesotans.

 

• Leveraging Private Investment to Create Jobs – We created a new performance-based business incentive initiative to create thousands of jobs and leverage $450 million in private investment.

 

• Building the Infrastructure Businesses Need – By increasing funding for the Transportation Economic Development initiative, we invested in road and bridge improvements that will promote economic development and put people to work today.

 

• Making Minnesota Globally Competitive – By making new investments in global trade, we will finally have the resources to help expand Minnesota exports and connect our state’s small businesses with trade partners in foreign markets – which will support thousands of jobs here in Minnesota.

 

• Cutting Taxes for All Minnesota Employers – We cut unemployment insurance taxes by $346.5 million, saving Minnesota employers more money to invest in their businesses and our economy.

 

• Making it Easier to Do Business in Minnesota – Right now, when businesses invest in new capital equipment, they pay sales tax and get reimbursed later. More than 1,700 companies received capital equipment sales tax exemptions in 2012, totaling over $182 million in refunds. Under the Governor’s budget, businesses would instead receive an upfront tax exemption for these purchases, starting in FY2016. This will provide simplicity for businesses and spur additional growth.

 

• Helping Greater Minnesota Businesses Recruit Workers – This budget provides a sales tax exemption for established businesses in Greater Minnesota that add employees and a tax credit for those who hire interns in Greater Minnesota.

 

• A Missed Opportunity in Bonding – This budget includes a bonding bill that will put Minnesotans back to work on significant projects such as the renovation of the State Capitol. Unfortunately, opposition from Republicans prevented passage of a larger bonding bill that would have provided funding for the Security Fence at the Shakopee prison, downtown revitalization projects in Mankato, Rochester, and St. Cloud, and numerous state college and university buildings.

Even Republicans and Libertarians agree that a flat rate income tax would be fair. Because we want out-of-state contributions (3.4%) and other goals, there will be a diversity of taxes. So Minnesota has added up all the local and state taxes and calculated the equivalent income tax for different income ranges. This study has been done for years. When Republicans were in power, the equivalent income tax went down for the richest and up for the poorest. Now the Democrats are bringing the the rate closer to a fair income tax rate. Click here for a larger image.

From the Governors Office:

The budget passed by the Governor and the majorities in the legislature creates a new 4 tier income tax bracket at 9.85% that will be paid only by the wealthiest 2% of Minnesotans. This new tax bracket will apply only to taxable income over $250,000 for married joint filers and taxable income over $150,000 for single filers.

 

$1.1 billion in New Revenue. This new tax bracket will help solve our budget deficit and invest in property tax relief for all Minnesotans,a better education system, and crucial economic development, measures to strengthen Minnesota’s middle class.

 

98% of Minnesotans Will See No Income Tax Increase.

[CORRECTION, 5/21: Pugh voted "Yes" on the SF 541 Sunday sales amendment, not "No".]

Data sourced from the House archive of roll-call votes.

I have a few miscellaneous but related items for you. First and I’m sure of great importance to every one on this list … the OFA has produced a database of climate science deniers in the US Congress. The following might be familiar to you:

“Carbon dioxide, Mister Speaker, is a natural byproduct of nature. Carbon dioxide is natural. It occurs in Earth. It is a part of the regular lifecycle of Earth. In fact, life on planet Earth can’t even exist without carbon dioxide. So necessary is it to human life, to animal life, to plant life, to the oceans, to the vegetation that’s on the Earth, to the, to the fowl that — that flies in the air, we need to have carbon dioxide as part of the fundamental lifecycle of Earth.”

Yeah, that’s Michele Bachmann and she’s on the list.

You can see the entire list HERE and drill down by state.

A lot of people want to know if tornadoes are going to become more common with global warming. The short answer is this: Severe storms have already become more common with global warming and this will continue to get worse, but individual categories of storms are very variable and hard to understand. For example, consider this:

I remember when I first moved to Minnesota. That summer we had numerous straight line wind events of the sort never seen before. Maplewood, a community near where I lived famous for it’s tree lined streets lost almost all of its trees in one storm. That same storm also took out most of the stock of most of the new car companies in that town, famous for its numerous car lots. The cars were pitted with hail stones. Every single home for about three miles along a street right near where I lived had it’s vinyl or aluminum siding drilled with hundreds of holes and dents from large hail stones being driven by a 60–100 mile per hour wind. It was one of the worst weather years in Minnesota, with insurance companies practically going bankrupt.

 

There were only a few tornadoes in the area that year.

 

The next year there were hardly any straight line wind storms of the magnitude just described. But that is the year of the Saint Peter tornado. It was one of the largest tornado events ever; It was a twister that lifted and dropped a couple of times, so ‘nato-pedants divide it into multiple events, but that’s absurd. It was an F3 and F4 event, and it tracked for 67 miles and was up to one and a half mile wide.

 

There were a lot of tornadoes that year.

As you can see, it is complicated. That quote is form something I just wrote on my science blog that you may be interested in: Understanding Storms and Global Warming: A Quaint Parable. That kind of goes along with two other posts, here and here.

I don’t mean to make this post a link farm but I thought many MnPP readers would be interested. Since Minnesotans are all about the weather and stuff.