This is a time to get together and eat and talk , just time for our friends. There is no format, dues, agenda etc., We can meet anytime or place we decide, picnic pot luck, local food, anything we want to, even invite speakers. But for now please show up, eat and talk to like minded friends. No need to RSVP just stop by and eat. email Trana if you like.
This first one is an interview of Paula (Kranz) Broadwell from last night. Paula is a Bismarck, ND, native. Paula graduated from Century High School in 1991.
Earlier this week Bloomberg had a "must read" piece about the wild west oil rush that's consuming the western half of North Dakota. The reporting includes some numbers that have mostly been ignored in North Dakota over the past couple years. The whole story is worth reading, but this excerpt, from the middle, really caught my attention...
“No one ever anticipated this type of impact,” said Donald W. Longmuir Jr., a planner and emergency coordinator for Mountrail County. “We’re actually three to five years behind in funding.”
Calls to the county’s volunteer ambulance and fire services tripled since 2009, Longmuir said.
Mountrail’s 1,600-mile road system -- which became so overloaded last spring that officials ran out of “road closed” signs, and postal carriers were unable to deliver the mail to some places -- needs to be rebuilt at a price tag of $600 million, Hynek said.
Williston received $1.5 million in 2011 from the oil extraction tax, which Koeser said “doesn’t even come close” to paying for its infrastructure needs.
LaFontaine, the Williston schools superintendent, said she needs about $87 million to build two elementary schools and one intermediate school and to hire new teachers. State lawmakers voted down a bill last year that would have provided some funding. LaFontaine, who based her estimate of 1,200 new students this fall on new housing construction, asked oil company executives to meet with her recently and asked for help paying for new facilities.
Bloomberg.com (This whole article is really very enlightening. Please read all of it.)
Did you get that? One county -- Mountrail County -- needs $600 million in the short term to fix all the roads that have been destroyed by oil traffic. How can this be?!?
Just before the 2011 legislative session, we were all told by the Bismarck Tribune / Associated Press that the total amount of money needed to repair oil field road destruction OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS in the entire western half of the state was $900 million. The "Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute" (part of NDSU [go figure]) put together a seventy-four (74) page study of the anticipated costs of oil fiend road repairs, and told us all 17 counties would need $900 over the next 20 years. (Here's a link to the report.)
I was surprised when I heard that $900 million over 20 years number because, back at that same time, I was hearing from friends in Mountrail County that Mountrail County alone would need at something like $250 million over the next five (5) years. (See the 8th comment, here.) I was trying to figure out how it could be possible that the other 16 then-currently-active oil field counties (not even taking into consideration other counties that are soon going to be dragged into this mess) would be able to split up the remaining $650 million ($900 million total over 20 years minus $250 million needed by Mountrail County in the next five years) over the next 20 years, while Mountrail County's road repair needs SURELY would not disappear in five years.
Then, during the 2011 ND legislative session, the legislature appropriated roughly $142 million for county and township road reconstruction money, total. (Source) During the 2011 special session another $23 million was appropriated for the biennium. (Source) That's a total of $165 million for counties and townships to divide up over the next two years for the 17 oil counties' road repairs. And it appears -- based upon a press release from the Governor's office -- that more than half of that money goes to townships, not counties. Because of the Mountrail County needs I was hearing about -- $250 million over five years -- the $165 million for 17 counties has never impressed me in the least, though it has been a constant, major bragging point for Republicans like Jack Dalrymple. I shoud mention, too, that there was another $100 million in "oil impact" grant money appropriated, and I'm not sure whether any of that can go to highways and roads. I'll just assume it can't becuase, if it could, it'd be more clear in all the gushing press releases.
And now, in the Bloomberg story, we find out Mountrail County's needs are actually $600 million over five years, and not $250 million over five years.
I know this is pretty arbitrary and unrealistic, but if you just randomly divided the $165 million between the 17 oil field counties over the two year biennium, each county and all the townships within it would get about $5 million per year for road repairs. I wonder how far that $5 million dollars per year goes when you're Mountrail County and need $120 million per year for each of the next five years.
Forgetting about the problems funding schools, etc., mentioned in the Bloomberg story, Counties don't have a lot of options when trying to figure out how to pay for these massive highway reconstruction needs. They can take the pittance that trickles down to them from the state and they can increase property taxes to pay for the rest of it. There's another paragraph in the Bloomberg story I got a chuckle out of.
Oil companies say they’re doing their part to help western North Dakota cope. Houston-based Marathon gave $1 million in Dickenson [sic], Continental donated $500,000 in Crosby, and New York- based Hess Corp. (HES) contributed $25 million to the state for public education, said Ron Ness, president of the Bismarck-based North Dakota Petroleum Council.
Well isn't that special? Some of the oil companies are taking tiny portions of their massive, record, billion dollar profits and giving a little back to localities, hoping it will distract the public's attention away from the enormity of the funding problems they are creating.
What's my point?
The "Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute" (UGPTI) report linked-to above needs another look. (More accurately, it probably needs to be round-filed.) I don't know who put that report together, but they are obviously either incompetent, or corrupt, or the oil field explosion was completely unanticipatable. I think folks on North Dakota's Industrial Commission -- Dalrymple, Stenehjem and Goehring -- have known all along the impending enormity of the oil field growth. How could they not? They issue the drilling permits. Their experts -- Lynn Helms, especially -- are making all kinds of huge predictions and have been for months or years.
Dalrymple, Stenehjem and Goehring are dropping the ball. Nobody is holding them accountable. Where is the press on this?
If we had competent leadership in North Dakota -- and we can't blame Democrats or any of this, because the people have put all their trust in the GOP -- the Republicans would be calling the UGPTI back in to explain how it is that their numbers are so far off. If there's no reasonable explanation, someone needs to be held accountable. But nobody's doing anything about any of this. Right now the only people WE can hold accountable are the politicians. And we'll have to wait until November to do that. Or... we can just cover our eyes and ears, put the fox back in the henhouse again, and hope for the best.
Here's another question for you to chew on: How is it possible some blogger (yours truly) knew Mountrail County's needs were so much more than the UGPTI was saying they were back in December 2010 and January 2011? I was off by more than half, but UGPTI's report is obviously off by a factor of another 5 or 10.
Yesterday’s local fish-wrap has decided to hock a book for Measure 2 supporters. What’s funny about this is: Apparently, after just having a judge approve their bankruptcy, the editors down at fish-wrap central are using a business model that justifies free advertisements under the guise of “ news”. Somehow someone figured Lee Enterprises stock prices will raise under this business model? Within their advertisement story, the fish-wrap even links to the Measure 2 wing-nut website so those suckered into buying the book can just “click” without Googling on their own. It's an amazing example of how easy it is for right-wingers to get their garbage printed in the Tribune. Stunningly easy.
Last week we here at NorthDecoder ran a guest piece asking a lot of questions about Measure 2. Where is the link in the fish-wrap’s story for that? Maybe that post alienated the Republicans at the Tribune by having too much truthful information. We aren’t hocking anything but the facts.
Well... the facts and one prediction.
Here's a prediction for 2012: Now that Lee Enterprises has wrapped up its bankruptcy, look for Lee to sell the Bismarck Tribune.
Buyer? My prediction is the Trib will be bought up by Forum Communications in 2012. That's what all the signs are pointing to. A complete news monopoly will be completed so nearly all print news can be controlled by the NDGOP.
When the sale is announced, remember you read it here first.
Former Attorney General Heidi Heitkamp issued this press release today:
HEITKAMP APPLAUDS CLARK'S NOMINATION TO ENERGY COMMISSION
Nominating Clark, A North Dakota Public Service Commissioner, Is Right Move For Our Nation
Former North Dakota Attorney General and U.S. Senate candidate Heidi Heitkamp released a statement today applauding the nomination of Republican North Dakota Public Service Commissioner Tony Clark to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC):
“It’s good news when a North Dakotan has an opportunity to help shape the nation’s energy development. I offer my congratulations to Tony Clark on his nomination to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and hope the United States Senate will act quickly to confirm his appointment. An independent voice on an independent federal agency is a good thing.
“Tony has years of experience focusing on various aspects of a wide range of energy issues and that will serve him in good stead. Now more than ever, we need a national energy policy that will develop and invest in the domestic energy production. And there is no better example of that than right here in North Dakota.”
FERC has regulatory control over the transmission of electricity, natural gas, and oil between states. Importantly, it also reviews plans for new liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals and plans for interstate natural gas pipelines.
In related news, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Tom Potter is hosting a "meet and greet" in Bismarck on Friday evening. Here's the 411 on that:
On Friday, January 27th from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., U.S. Senate Candidate Tom Potter of Grand Forks will host a meet and greet at The Kelly Inn in Bismarck, N.D. Potter is inviting all interested press and local Democrats to join him at The Kelly Inn at that time.
Dr. Potter taught finance at the University of North Dakota for most of his life, and now serves as the half time lay pastor of the First Presbyterian Church in Red Lake Falls, Minn. Dr. Potter is married to Louise “Weezie” Potter, who served two terms in the North Dakota House, from 2002-2010. The couple still lives in Grand Forks, where they enjoy the company of their daughter’s family, which includes three of their seven grandchildren. The Potter’s also have two grown sons who live with their families in Colorado and Georgia.
Dr. Potter has been active in the Dem-NPL politics for over 30 years, but this is his first time running for an elective office.
There's nothing wrong with a little Hoeven-Berg style economic development in the Bakken, right?
Losing senior citizens because they can no longer afford to live in this city due to the steep spikes in rental costs “is just killing us,” the city’s mayor told state officials on Wednesday.
During a discussion of the challenges his city faces because of the oil boom, Mayor Ward Koeser highlighted the top issues and emphasized the struggle over how to keep the city’s long-term residents.
[ ]
Seniors on fixed incomes can’t afford rents jumping from $500 to $2,000 per month, and they’re leaving the city to get away from the hassle or because they have no choice, Koeser said.
“It’s just killing us. I don’t know what the right term is, but the impact on our community when you lose people who have been here 30, 40, 50 years … they’re the kind of people you want, and they have to move,” he said.
JamestownSun.com ("Rent, housing costs force many seniors out of Williston")
Lighten up, Ward. Welcome to the new, more "Legendary" North Dakota.
While visiting with Dustin and Steve on KFYR this afternoon I said I'd post links to some of the source material for facts I talked about today. I don't remember all the things I said I'd link to, so I'll just post a few and hope I've covered everything:
The Canadian oil industry, with the strong backing of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government, wants to build a pipeline to move crude oil from Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico.
The firms involved have asked the U.S. State Department to approve this project, even as they've told Canadian government officials how the pipeline can be used to add at least $4 billion to the U.S. fuel bill.
U.S. farmers, who spent $12.4 billion on fuel in 2009, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, could see expenses rise to $15 billion or higher in 2012 or 2013 if the pipeline goes through.
At least $500 million of the added expense would come from the Canadian market manipulation.
Of course, American consumers will pay the price of this highway robbery. Food prices will rise because they reflect farm operating costs.
In addition, millions of Americans will spend 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel as tribute to our "friendly" neighbors to the north.
The Keystone XL pipeline will move production from Canadian oil sands to a deepwater port from where it can be exported.
According to TransCanada, KXL will increase the price of heavy crude oil in the Midwest by almost $2 to $4 billion annually, and escalating for several years.72 It will do this by diverting major volumes of Tar Sands oil now supplying the Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel, adding up to $5 billion to the annual US fuel bill.73 Further, the KXL pipeline will do nothing to insulate the US from oil price volatility.74
Even one year of fuel price increases as a result of KXL could cancel out some or all of the jobs created by KXL, based on the (more accurate) $3 to 4 billion budget for KXL (the remaining cost to build within the Us). Higher fuel prices due to KXL would have broad adverse impacts. Gasoline is a significant cost for most Americans, and especially for those with lower incomes and/or residing in rural areas. Moreover, refined oil products (notably gasoline and diesel) are very widely used throughout the economy (especially in agriculture and commercial transportation). So higher fuel prices due to KXL would ripple through the economy and impact a very broad range of people and businesses.
3. NorthDecoder.com -- Not to toot my own horn, but I wrote a blog post about John Hoeven's promise to raise oil prices in the region. He said "the new pipeline capacity will also reduce the discount on North Dakota crude, increasing the price producers get by $4 per barrel." If you have half a brain, you know that "increasing the price producers get" translates, directly, to "increases the price at the pump." Think about that: When producers get a higher price, consumers end up paying higher prices. Hoeven issued a press release promising higher gas prices for consumers and small businesses. The press release is still available on his U.S. Senate website.
4. ThinkProgress.org (for Department of Energy-verified chonology of events relating to Solyndra.
It’s often claimed that the Solyndra loan guarantee was “rushed through” by the Obama Administration for political reasons. In fact, the Solyndra loan guarantee was a multi-year process that the Bush Administration launched in 2007.
You’d never know from the media coverage that:
1. The Bush team tried to conditionally approve the Solyndra loan just before President Obama took office.
2. The company’s backers included private investors who had diverse political interests.
3. The loan comprises just 1.3% of DOE’s overall loan portfolio. To date, Solyndra is the only loan that’s known to be troubled.
5. MediaMatter.org (more corrections of misinformation about Solyndra)
$4.5 million per year in North Dakota tax money goes to Odney Advertising -- eight times what we spend on the North Dakota Department of Veterans Affairs (per biennium numbers at p. 3) -- and this is what we get. All so John Hoeven's old high school pal can feed at the government trough while helping other Republicans pretend to hate the government trough. Sweet deal, eh?
Sad. Or embarrassing. Or both.
For more information about North Dakota's Audobon AudubonNational Wildlife Refuge, click here.
A lot of politics has been happening in January, while I’ve been closing out the hunting season, opening up the fishing season and playing in the Bad Lands. It’s been such a nice winter, it’s hard to stay inside and sit down at a computer, something a part-time blogger has to do. So today I’ll catch up. Starting at the top.
Newt Gingrich is the new, and perhaps permanent, front-runner for the Republican nomination for President of the United States. I almost choked writing that. I’m still giggling about his win in South Carolina Saturday night, where he got more votes from evangelical Christians than any of the other candidates. Right after the news media carried stories about him shuttling his mistress in his back door as his wife was going out the front. Y’know, it’s one thing for the good old boys in South Carolina saying “Yep, old Newt, he knows how to deal with women, all right,” and casting their votes for him out of admiration, but it’s another when those born once too many times agree with them. You go, Newt. I want you on the fall ballot.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch here in North Dakota, there’s a whole list of politically entertaining things to watch. Starting with the U.S. Senate race. Democratic-NPL candidate Heidi Heitkamp’s polls are telling her that President Obama is a big liability for her this year, so she went after him on his Keystone Pipeline decision. Not just once, but twice. Made me a little nervous. It’s not just that I disagree with her on the President’s decision to stop the pipeline for the time being (I do). But if I were advising her—something I have done from time to time—I’d probably have said that instead of ripping Obama, she might have said that if John Hoeven and his Republican cronies in the U.S. Senate had not introduced legislation to force Obama’s hand on the issue earlier than he wanted to, this situation could have been avoided and pipeline supporters would have had more time to negotiate with the President, and maybe get him to compromise a bit more.
“Heidi,” I’d have said, “it’s January. January is the time to firm up your base, to get rank and file Democrats excited about your candidacy, to recruit the thousands of supporters and volunteers you are going to need this fall to get yourself elected. January is not the time you try to convert Republican voters by bashing the President of your own party, especially on an issue on which most members of your own party agree with the President. There’ll be plenty of time to distance yourself from an unpopular President, if that is what you have to do, later this fall, closer to the election, when people will actually remember what you’ve done. Not much you do in January will stick with independents and undecided, marginal voters nine months from now.” But then, nobody asked me.
There’s something nagging me about what’s being used as the best argument for North Dakotans to support this pipeline. Lately, it’s been stated as “fact” by Senators and candidates and other supporters that the pipeline would ship 100,000 barrels of oil a day from the Bakken oil field. That has evolved into 100,000 barrels a day from North Dakota. And then the next “fact” that follows is that there will be 500 fewer trucks on North Dakota’s highways as a result. Where does all that come from? I’d like some documentation on that. I’d like to know how that works, and where the signed contracts are.
I mean, how DOES that work? How do they keep our “sweet crude” from getting mixed in with that dirty tar sands oil? Is it gonna be like using one of those dividers you put between your groceries and the guy in front of you on the conveyor at the grocery store, separating the Canadian oil from ours while we quickly put a hundred thousand barrels of OUR oil in the pipe? And how long does it take to pump in that 100,000 barrels? That’s a lot of barrels. Must be some pump. I’m no engineer, but I’d sure like to see THAT operation.
And then, where are the contracts? Is there some proof that there’s going to be 100,000 barrels of our oil shipped out every day? I hope we’re not being played for suckers, to get our support. You know, there’s such a crisis in our oil patch right now that we’re willing to grasp at straws for easy-sounding solutions. But I’m afraid this 100,000 barrels a day “fact” might be one of those things that started out as coffee table speculation and made it through so many incarnations it became believable to those who want to believe. I think, before one more politician uses that “fact” again, he or she should demand to see a written contract, and then we should publish it in the legal notices of the state’s newspapers, so we’re sure of what we’re talking about. Otherwise, I worry that our politicians are just using this to beat up Obama, because the polls say he is a very unpopular man here in North Dakota. Well, he’s not an unpopular man at my house. I’m not going to go into all the good reasons for not building this pipeline, but I trust a lot of really smart people who have stated those reasons, and apparently the President does too. 100,000 barrels a day? I‘ll believe it when I see it, I guess.
Okay, back to politics. Next, let’s talk about Kevin Cramer. To paraphrase a line from a character in one of my favorite western shows, “Kevin, how do you get your pants on in the morning over those big balls of yours?” Kevin sent shock waves over the few media people who actually follow politics in North Dakota, and over his fellow Republicans this week, by announcing he was just going to say “Screw the party and its convention,” and go directly to the Primary Election to secure the Republican nomination for Congress.
As the Forum pointed out, Kevin Cramer “has been a party man all his life . . . he’s run for public office several times as a loyal party member and with the imprimatur of the party apparatus.“ But, “This time, Cramer will preside over an unprecedented political defection from Republican ranks and party orthodoxy.” The Forum went on to say, “He’s made a calculation that he would likely not win the party’s endorsement, so the primary is the only other route he has to run . . .”
Mike Jacobs, in his column in the Grand Forks Herald, agreed, mostly, and argued that Shane Goettle, the Hoeven favorite, was likely to get the convention endorsement. But Jacobs also recognized that with or without the party’s convention endorsement, Cramer was likely the best candidate in the fall, pointing out there’s no mystery about Cramer’s move.
Well, I’m not so sure they’ve read Cramer’s logic right. Here’s how I see it, as do a few of my knowledgeable Republican friends:
Kevin has raised a good deal of money. He could spend it wooing Republican convention delegates, or he could go ahead and start spending it wisely on a real campaign for the office. Instead of using all his money hiring on-the-ground organizational staff and printing brochures and mailing letters to delegates and throwing parties at the state convention, he can go ahead and prepare his media campaign and use the Primary Election as a way to begin building his popularity for the November election. The other candidates are going to go through the convention process, spend a lot of energy and money, and then not have that money to run against Kevin in the Primary. Or against Pam Gulleson in the fall.
The other flaw in the conventional wisdom—that because Goettle is Hoeven’s choice, he’ll automatically get the convention endorsement—is that it might not be a “Hoeven Convention.” Hoeven’s not on the ballot. He’s comfortably ensconced in Our Nation’s Capital, and is not going to be here, running around the state, campaigning for Goettle, or anyone else, for that matter. The convention could be flooded with conservative “Tea Party” types who have no love for the moderate Hoeven. They’d be more likely to support one of the realistic conservatives in the race, Cramer or Brian Kalk. Cramer could indeed win at the convention.
But Kevin’s not concerned about the party apparatus right now. As I have said before, he wants more than anything in the world to go to Washington, DC. He’s the consummate politician. He’s looked at this from every angle and decided this is the best path. And he’s right. This is his best shot. With a $100,000 media buy in late May and early June, he’ll beat the Republican-endorsed candidate in the Primary and move on to the November campaign. Will it work? Can he win in November? That remains to be seen. If it’s a good Republican year, he’ll go to Congress. If it’s not, he won’t, and the second-guessers will say “I told you so.” In any case, he’s made the political year more interesting.
Not that it’s a dull year. Republican Legislators RaeAnn Kelsch and Tony Grindberg are making sure of that. RaeAnn, the House member from Mandan, and her husband, Tom, don’t like to pay taxes—something every elected official should probably do. She got busted. It looks like she owes the government more than $300,000 in taxes and penalties. I hate to say this, because she used to be a friend of mine—I say “used to be” only because I just don’t see her any more, not that anything specific has happened to cause our friendship to diminish—but she probably ought to just quit politics right now. Oh, because the Democrats in Mandan are in such disarray, she could probably still be re-elected—after all she did win the last election with the stain of a DUI on her record (I think she left a bar, stopped at a stop light, and promptly fell asleep behind the wheel sitting at the light)—but there needs to be some display of honor and respect for government and the people here, especially after the tawdry display of hauling her family in front of TV cameras the other day when she called a news conference—at Republican headquarters, no less—to say she was sorry.
And Grindberg, the Senator from Fargo, is under scrutiny for double dipping during the Legislative session, taking his NDSU salary AND his Legislative salary at the same time. About a $40,000 double dip, according to the folks at the Say Anything (and they do) blog.
It will be interesting to see if charges are filed against either of them. Kelsch did not pay any income taxes—did not even file a tax return—for six years. Grindberg took $40,000 of state funds he [editor: allegedly] wasn’t entitled to. Could you or I get away with that?
There’s one more Legislative race to keep an early eye on. In the newly-created District 7, a rural Bismarck district, current District 8 Republican Legislator Dwight Wrangham is seeking endorsement for the State Senate. Wrangham, you may remember, got busted for drunk driving last year, and a lot of Republicans are worried that he could become a distraction and an embarrassment for the party. They’ve recruited Nicole Poolman, wife of former Insurance Commissioner Jim Poolman, to challenge Wrangham for the endorsement. Nicole is a teacher and, if her politics are anything like her husband’s, a moderate. Wrangham is neither. It will be interesting to see if this one goes to a Primary contest after the district convention delegates make their choice. Word on the street is that former Republican state chairman Gary Emineth, now a Tea party organizer in North Dakota, and a few of his conservative friends are looking to take on some of the more moderate Republican legislators and candidates in both convention challenges and primary contests. It will be interesting to see if they can build enough support for Wrangham at the convention, or if they have to take him to the Primary. And, I suppose, to see if they get involved in a Cramer-Goettle race for the Congressional seat at the June Primary.
Quick note to let folks know that, unless something unexpected comes up, I'll be on KFYR AM talk radio this afternoon from 4pm to 5pm with Steve Bakken and Dustin Gawrylow.
You can stream it on the interwebs or by using the IHeartRadio app on your smartphone if you're not in the AM 550 listening area and are so inclined. Tune in.
We'll be talking government, politics, media and stuff. If you have anything you'd like us to talk about, post a comment.
First, the "Arrive a Guest; Leave a Legend" ad caught the eye of a Washington Post writer/college writing professor, Rebecca J. Ritzel, who tweeted this:
... which is nice. Or not.
Second, Grand Forks legislator Sen. Ray Holmberg (R-Grand Forks) sounded in from a Starbucks in South Beach, describing the Odney Advertising ad as "sleazy," "tasteless and unbecoming of the image the state has worked hard to create." Here's his email...
... which is nice.
Point? It's not just "current-administration-questioning" liberals and "too-much-time-on-their-hands" cheeto-eaters who watch Jersey Shore -- I've never seen it, thank you very little -- who think the ad was problematic. It caused concern for the chairman of the North Dakota Senate Appropriations Committee.
Third, it's interesting to know that while all the group-thinking-Finkennites at Tourism were gushing about what a great ad this was and there was one, lonely, reasonable guy in the building whose warnings were completely ignored -- and since forgotten -- by the Finkennites.
That guy is Scooter Pursley. Folks in Bismarck may recognize his name from his days as a sports writer for the Bismarck Tribune. Pursley tried to point out the problem(s) with the "decisions" ad to others at Tourism. Sara Otte Coleman wrote an email to the folks in Tourism suggesting "none of us caught this" problem while the ads were being reviewed. Pursley apparently took this as a slight as he had "brought the issue up on a couple times during proofing of the image section that the 'decisions' could be misconstrued." NOTE: He brought it up "A COUPLE TIMES." His concerns were ignored; his boss claiming she "didn't hear [his] comment.":
[I] hope we are always not [sic] open to everyone's opinion.
[The "not" is in the original, Freudian-slip-like or otherwise.]
I've been imagining a group of young, cool, fashionably-dressed hipsters sitting in a fancy, high-tech conference room in the palace on Century Avenue. Odney is unveiling the ads to the Tourism Division's thinkers. Pursley's been invited and, being a male and a recovering sports writer, he feels a little out of place in his sweat pants, tennis shoes and "Twins" hoodie with a ketchup stain on the front. (Hey, I'm kidding; lighten up.) Here's the exchange:
Sara: For those of you who don't know her, I'd like to introduce Trish and Sue, from the North Dakota Department of Odney. They're going to do the offical campaign unveil today. Trish? Sue?
[clapping]
Trish: Thanks, everyone. This is so exciting so let's just get going. I'd like to start with our "girls night out" ad. Sue?
Trish: Thanks everyone. We wanted to attract Canadian shoppers to Fargo for a weekend of shopping. We think they'll come if they know we have a bar downtown where they sell beer and you can score some strange.
Room (minus Scooter): Yes!!!
[clapping]
Trish: So what do you think?
Room (minus Scooter): Bravo!!! Author!!!
[Scooter, cautiouslyraising hand.]
Scooter: Um. I'm reading the copy on this and thinking, it's kinda sketchy. "Decisions?" Really!?! What "decisions" are being made in this picture? I can see if this were an ad from the Hospitality Association. Sure. But this is a state taxpayer funded ad from the State of North Dakota; maybe tax dollars shouldn't go to pay for ads suggesting these hip young fellows and ladies are somehow about to earn "legend" status on that night. I mean...
Room: Boooooo! Hisssss! Don't be ridiculous.
Scooter: See, I don't have a problem with these guys and gals hooking up. The picture's not so bad. That's not it at all. And it'd be tame for a HoDo ad in a City Pages magazine. But... This is a state government ad. And the King has no clothes.
Room: What?!? Silence! Pat Finken might hear you.
Scooter: There are no Weapons of Mass Destruction!
Room: Shhhhhh! Not here! Not now! Don't say that!
[Scooter, shrinking.]
Scooter: Okay. It's fine. Never mind.
Trish: Great. So everybody loves it. Let's take a look at Ad #2... Momentos, Sue!
My suggestion to Pursley: You might want to be both diligent and overbearing with this crowd. Bring a bat. And they still might not hear you.
I should also note that Pursley's exchange left me wondering about Sara Otte Coleman's words in her letter to the editor in the Grand Forks Herald. She wrote this:
Our first reaction to the negative feedback was, “Wow! Some people have too much time on their hands and watch a little too much Jersey Shore.” But as the comments evolved, we realized that some people read much more into this ad than what we were trying to communicate and that their interpretation certainly was not what we were trying to accomplish.
Frankly, we were surprised by their reaction, and we apologize to anyone who was offended by the ad.
It just seems odd to me that the first reaction in the Tourism Department was to insult the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Their second reaction was to go a step further and to insult their staff by saying they were "surprised" by the reaction, even though a staff member had sounded the alarm.
Seems to me like these folks need a public relations firm. (Free advice: you might want to hire someone new this go around.)
Fourth... There's this:
Sorry, North Dakota. We love you, but we need to have a little talk with your tourism department.
Recently our friends in the northwest launched an advertising campaign that uses the slogan "Arrive a Guest; Leave a Legend." And they use the photograph below to illustrate their point.
What's the point they are trying to convey? Seems to us it's, "Visit North Dakota and you'll get laid by one of our easy women."
Here's my question for the dudes (and I'm gonna be sexist and presumptuous here in assuming they're dudes; because that's how I roll) at 247comedy.com: "What makes you think it's the women in the picture that are easy? Seems a little sexist and presumptuous of you to say it's the women, no?"
Just sayin'.
I gotta say, though, that I think this -- \/`-- guy's perspective is... different?
If the ad said, “North Dakota: There is almost nothing here and half the year its balls cold ” That would be accurate, but it’s not really going to help us.
Maybe you’ve never been here. What we’ve got to sell for the young, hip, traveling, expendable cash crowd is “We like to drink and we aren’t afraid of a little humpen. Want scenery? Is flat scenery? No? Shots! Wanna see people drinking PBR un-ironically? Welcome to North Dakota. Wanna meet a guy who has a handle bar mustache, but has never heard of The Decemberists? Welcome to North Dakota! Wanna throw aluminum and plastic in the trash and not hear about it? Welcome to North Dakota!”
Also, I am not accepting the argument that this ad objectifies women. First off, let’s look at the demographic makeup of the people in this state vs the demographic makeup of the people in this ad. North Dakota is 90% white, 1.2% Black, 1% Asian (I am assuming the women on the far right is Asian, although she might be Hispanic which is 1.2% of the population). Based on those statistics its unlikely this ad is saying “Men, visit North Dakota, there are hot chicks walking around the streets that you can bone.”
What far more likely is the women are the tourists in this ad. This ad seems to be saying “Women, come to North Dakota, we keep men in glass boxes and display them so you and your friends can point, giggle and collect some hearty Nordic breeding seamen.”
The North Dakota Tourism Division thought it was worth reading, as they circulated that link in an email. They probably liked it for the graphic near the end. Perhaps they'll hire Dobson for his suggestion for our next tax-dollar-funded ad campaign...
One Tourism employee was asking if they could threaten people who parody the Odney ad campaign. I have two words (or three, if you split the hyphenated word) with a(n) letter/initial between them for that employee: Campbell v. Acuff-Rose. Look it up.
Something fairly unique has happened in Presidential Politics this month, and I haven't heard many people talk about it. For the first time in what I classify as the modern era of presidential primaries*, the three earliest states have each voted for a different Republican candidate for President. This has happened three times on the Democratic side. In 1984, 1988, and 1992. If you're hoping for some help as to which state was right in those cases, to predict the current calendar, you aren't going to get much help though. In each of those cases, the winner of a different state went on to take the nomination**.
So here we are now, with the "official" results of Iowa now showing that Rick Santorum squeaked out a win there (and the IA GOP making a strong case for keeping its first-in-the-nation status as a result), New Hampshire predictably picking the candidate from Massachusetts (Mitt Romney) as they always do when given the chance***, and South Carolina handing Newt Gingrich a decisive victory (along with a lead of pledged delegates since that contest is winner take all while New Hampshire and Iowa are proportional).****
At this point, I will publicly entertain a possibility that I have privately proffered a few times: that no Republican candidate will retain a majority of pledged delegates going in to the convention. I admit that this looks like less of a possibility now than it did a month ago prior to the withdrawal of many of the not-Romney candidates, but if Ron Paul sticks it out and either Gingrich or (more likely) Santorum drop out in an effort to consolodate the social conservative vote, it is entirely possible that Congressman Paul could hold onto enough delegates to throw the convention into deadlock and deny the other candidates an absolute majority on the first ballot. Given his lack of percieved interest in returning for another term in Congress, I could see this as a distinct possibility. To further solidify this, while Romney might win Nevada and possibly Florida, the next two states on the calendar, following those contests will be a string of small state primaries with proportional representation in most cases, splitting the delegates among all the candidates. Romney will have a tough time holding his lead in many of these cases since the other candidates will be able to remain viable throughout these contests. It is very easy to see how a candidate will have a difficulty obtaining an outright majority of pledged delegates in this scenario.
In the event that this happens, all bets would be off. The Republican Superdelegates (yes, they do exist) could concievably grab the reigns at this point and throw the nomination to the establishment candidate (Romney), but I'm not sure that would go over well in the general election. In the event that this does not happen, the second ballot could produce any candidate the convention wants (even one that never ran for the nomination to begin with--the "dark horse"). We could in theory see Chris Christie as the nominee in this unlikely scenario.
I admit that the scenario I laid out above is highly unlikely and offered more out of a hope of witnessing a little bit of political history than anything else. I also recognize that Mitt Romney is still the odds-on favorite to win the nomination outright, (Especially since Republicans seem to have a tradition of giving the guy that lost the last contested nomination the nod) but my scenario is not outside the realm of possibility in the modern political age*. In 1976, the Republicans held a brokered convention when President Ford failed to obtain an outright majority of delegates going into the convention. In the end, he won on the first ballot when Mississippi switched its votes at the last minute to grant Ford a majority, but after Ronald Reagan's concession speech, people walked away from the convention wondering if they had nominated the wrong candidate. We all know how that election went...
In the end, my point remains that the Republican contest remains wide open, and as a Democrat, I'm happy to watch the other side beat the crap out of itself. Pass the popcorn, folks, we're in for a long road ahead.
Footnotes:
*I consider the modern presidential nominating era to have begun in 1972 following the McGovern Commission. This is the point at which all of the States in the Union held presidential primaries or caucuses that were open to the general public and delegates were selected based mostly on those results.
**Walter Mondale won IA in '84, Michael Dukakis won NH in '88, and Bill Clinton won SC in '92.
***see Kerry--2004, Tsongas--1992, Dukakis--1988, JFK--1960 and the only real exception: Ted Kennedy--1980, who lost to the incumbent President, Jimmy Carter. I'm not sure that counts...
Yesterday’s local fish-wrap has decided to hock a book for Measure 2 supporters. What’s funny about this is: Apparently, after just 
