Policy Blog
March 12, 2010
A few of David Walker's appearances
David Walker, who will be speaking with the Citizens League next Tuesday (reserve your spot now!) has certainly taken his message to a wide variety of shows. Here are a few clips:
60 Minutes:Glenn Beck:
The Daily Show:
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| David Walker | ||||
| ||||
Fresh Air: Click for audio
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 11:28 AM | Comments (0)
March 10, 2010
Gathering Minnesotans's vision for our parks and trails
Today's blog comes from Stacy Becker, Project Director, Parks and Trails Legacy Project public participation plan:
The Citizens League is honored to be working with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources as it engages Minnesotans in their Parks and Trails Legacy Project. The project will establish guidelines for how money from the constitutional "Legacy Amendment" and other traditional sources of funding will be spent over the next 25 years based on the vision and priorities of Minnesotans. Note that the purview for this work is just for Minnesota's parks and trails, and has no relationship with or impact on how the other Legacy monies will be spent (clean water, preservation, and arts and culture).
Drawing on our lessons from the Minnesota Anniversary Project, we're striving to create a process that is meaningful and engaging, and that yields results that will help shape better public policy (and ergo, lead to better outcomes). We believe that how Minnesotans are asked to engage is just as important as what issue they're asked about.
Part of our current model, which we'll be testing out and asking for your feedback on at a Mind Opener on March 31st, draws methods we've used at annual meetings and in our work on redistricting and long term care. It's a combination of facilitated small group discussions which will result in a report back and also utilize interactive response devices (the clickers). We hope that this combination will yield both qualitative and quantitative feedback that can be used to create the plan. As importantly, we also hope that this process provides an avenue for Minnesotans to engage on the issues, share their perspectives, and learn about others.
This Parks and Trails Legacy Project will also serve as the inaugural project on CitiZing!, our purpose-built -- and the one and only -- civic networking platform. CitiZing! combines cutting edge Web 2.0 tools with our public participation process. Stay tuned for its full launch in mid-April.
The input we gather from Minnesotans will absolutely guide the plan. The DNR chose the Citizens League in part because of our innovative public process and staunch belief that working collaboratively with citizens will lead to better policy results. Minnesotans' feedback and information will serve as the basis for decisions for the DNR's workgroups, who will be responsible for writing plan elements.
The DNR will be launching a project website soon, and CitiZing! will kick off in April. Stay tuned for these, as well as for information on when we'll be hosting a public meeting near you. And in the meantime, please join us for the Mind Opener to help us build this process.
Stacy Beckerstacybecker[at]comcast.net
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 11:07 AM | Comments (0)
More on proposed ACCESS
Yesterday, the Legislature heard the proposed ACCESS system, a new system to evaluated students for graduation that includes end-of-course exams. On Monday, the Pioneer Press explained the proposal, and the Star Tribune weighed in with an editorial against backing down on graduation standards.
The Citizens League gathered input from students and educators on the ACCESS proposal in February, concluding with this report. The MN Business Partnership also responded with a dissenting report.
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:52 AM | Comments (0)
February 26, 2010
Educators' and Students' Insights on Assessment and Accountability
Educational accountability systems, like No Child Left Behind and Minnesota's graduation standards, are predicated on the notion that they create expectations and incentives for educational achievement. At the same time, they have been used as "gatekeepers," identifying students deserving of promotion and/or diplomas and honors. Widespread failure on these assessments can lead to a number of different explanations. Perhaps the standards for what a student should know are inappropriately high. Perhaps the test was flawed. Perhaps the teachers and schools failed in their responsibility to prepare students. Perhaps the students failed in their responsibility to learn the subject matter.
Or, perhaps none of the above.
After interviewing 59 high school students and 20 educators from six schools, the Citizens League found that Minnesota's existing accountability system is not yet producing its intended consequences, despite concerted efforts by many people. It was clear, though not unanimous, that a new proposed accountability system called ACCESS would be a welcome step in the right direction.
Stacy Becker and Kim Farris-Berg headed this project on behalf of the Citizens League for the University of Minnesota, and they summarized the findings in this paper.
They are very interested in hearing what people think about these ideas, so Stacy asked that I put the article out here for you to read and comment.
What do you think?
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 12:47 PM | Comments (0)
February 24, 2010
Secrets for Citizen Lobbyists
Tim McDonald, whose organization Education|Evolving sublets space across the hall from us, recently dropped a decades-old copy of a publication called Secrets for Citizen Lobbying on Sean's desk. It may have been old, but it was an incredibly straight-forward guide for us average folks on how government works, and what you should do if you want to influence it. We did a little poking around, and it turns out that this guide is still being produced.
Our thanks to David Ewald and the others at Ewald Consulting, who are responsible for the book.
Take a look:
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:00 AM | Comments (1)
February 23, 2010
Bridges to a Better Bottom Line
The blog today comes from Allison Good, a member of the Rochester Affiliate Steering Committee:
In response to the budget and economic challenges facing Minnesota, five of Minnesota's largest foundations collaborated with Public Strategies Group on the Minnesota Bottom Line project to spark new thinking about how public services are funded and delivered in Minnesota; ideas different from the traditional approaches of either cutting services or increasing taxes.
Thus, on January 20, 2010, the new Citizens League Rochester affiliate welcomed Laurie Ohmann, CEO of Public Strategies Group, who provided a project overview to a receptive audience of over fifty citizens. The fact that so many attendees remained following her excellent presentation to share their thoughts is indicative of the significance of PSG's report, the keep interest of local leaders to find solutions, and the hopeful messages within.
Moderated table discussions focused around three questions:
- What can we do to move away from the "raise taxes/cut spending" debate to asking whether we are getting the value we want fro public services for the price we pay?
- Create common ground outside of or including political parties. Parties' "bread and butter" is the conflict of the "raise taxes/cut spending" debate. The political will to change this debate is limited.
- We can't move people away from the current debate. We need to wait until they have exhausted themselves discussing "raise taxes/cut spending," then have an alternative available. We need to publicize today's information -- get it to the legislators and the public so they have information when they're ready to listen.
- Are there ways you would modify or strengthen the proposal? If they are incomplete, how would you broaden them? If they are wrong, can you propose a better alternative?
- The general principles that informed the approach may be a more important take-away than the specific results of this attempt.
- What follow-up activity from today's forum would you recommend to the Citizens League Rochester Steering Committee?
- Give some thought to exercises that require assuming views counter to your own -- e.g., how would you make the best case for the opposite view?
- Narrow the topics to one or two issues and try to advance broad changes. Health care and public safety/corrections policy were two that seemed to get the most attention.
Allison's summary gives you some idea of the conversation at the event. Reactions, comments or ideas?
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 3:04 PM | Comments (0)
February 22, 2010
Sean's letter to legislators supporting judicial selection reform
If you've been following this blog, you know that the Citizens League is supporting a change to the way Minnesota elects judges.
On Friday, Sean Kershaw sent the following letter on letterhead of the Coalition for Impartial Justice to state legislators urging them to support HF224 (Simon) and SF270 (Rest).
Please contact your legislators and urge them to do the same -- a legislator finder, draft email text, and more information about the issue and the Citizens League's position can be found here.
Sean's letter:
The Citizens League urges your support in the effort to pass HF224 (Simon) and SF270 (Rest), which would put needed changes on the 2010 ballot to preserve the integrity and impartiality of Minnesota's courts by reforming the way judges are selected and elected.
States with partisan judicial elections are seeing those contests devolve into big-money battles featuring vicious attack ads. Concern that the scales of justice might be tilted by campaign contributions and political pressure has sparked an increased interest across the nation in preserving an impartial judiciary.
A poll conducted in 2008 by Decision Resources Ltd. shows that the public thinks there is a problem and supports the proposed changes:
- 78% of voters believe judicial candidates making pledges to political parties or other special interests on political issues threaten the fairness of the courts.
- 75% believe judicial fundraising is a threat to the fairness of the judiciary.
- 74% of Minnesota voters support merit selection with retention elections, with only 16% opposed.
The public understands that paying for judges to make political promises is like paying referees for a particular outcome before a football game. Whether or not a decision is truly effected, the perception is enough to damage trust in our judicial system. In addition, this legislation and a positive vote from the public in November 2010 would do much more than limit the possibility of big-money, negative campaigns. The proposed reforms would also offer improvements over the current system in the following areas:
- The evaluation and information available on judicial performance.
- The information available for voters to decide whether to retain a sitting judge.
The Citizens League is part of the Coalition for Impartial Justice. The Coalition is made up of a variety of groups from across the political spectrum that are united in their support of HF224/SF270. We urge you to support this legislation.
Sincerely,
Sean Kershaw
Executive Director
Citizens League
Download this letter as a pdf.
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 2:12 PM | Comments (0)
February 18, 2010
A Healthy Democracy Requires Citizenship
Today's post comes from Sheila Kiscaden, Citizens League board member from the Rochester affiliate. This text was also published as an Op-Ed in the Rochester Post-Bulletin on January 27th.
As the Legislature and Congress convene, political campaigns begin in earnest, partisanship continues to dominate decision-making, anger and shouting drown out civil debate, and campaign rules are overturned by the Supreme Court, it's a good time to ask ourselves, do we have a healthy democracy?
A healthy democracy requires more than voting. It requires more than its citizens "giving back" by making contributions or volunteering. It requires more than supporting a favorite candidate or political party. It requires more than advocating for personal interests when a decision is about to be made. It is much more than shouting down someone who does not agree with you.
A healthy democracy requires that people come together, deliberate, and take action on the things that they define as important in their community. In a healthy democracy, citizen-centered discussions help identify problems or concerns and help create solutions. All points of view are welcome and heard. Civility dominates.
Pro-active citizenship is different than showing up when government entities schedule hearings or feedback sessions to give the public a chance to comment on the plans or proposals that already have been developed.
In a strong democracy, citizens can initiate on their own to examine and learn about issues directly. In a strong democracy, leaders welcome opportunities to listen to what the people have to say before problems are defined and solutions selected. Leaders are not threatened when citizens expect them to be directly accountable or disagree with proposals they advance.
In Rochester, there are encouraging signs that a strong democracy is valued. A variety of groups seek to give citizens space to practice these elements of a strong democracy. Local print and broadcast media report on local issues and give citizens forums for healthy discussions and debate. The Chamber of Commerce, the League of Women Voters, the Post-Bulletin, and other community organizations host forums, briefings, debates and events to inform and engage citizens.
And now another group is offering ways to be involved and to practice active citizenship and civic leadership. The Citizens League, a think tank in which citizen-members do the thinking and analysis, has been invited by local citizens to open its first affiliate outside the Twin Cities in Rochester.
Over its fifty year history, the Citizens League has translated citizens' concerns and interests into actions and solutions that have contributed to Minnesota's quality of life, and it has earned the trust of leaders in all major parties. No small accomplishment in these very partisan times!
With its mission of "Common Ground. Common Good," the Citizens League will be a welcome addition to Rochester's effort to provide opportunities for citizens to connect with each other, have civil debate, and seek good politics, sound policy and a healthy democracy.
Despite the times we live in, many of us continue to have a strong belief in the power and potential of all citizens. We do not forget that our democracy is based on "we, the People." We know that while "freedom is not free," neither is citizenship and a healthy democracy. We know a strong democracy takes attention and effort. We are willing to make the effort because we know it's worth it. Join us.
Sheila KiscadenCitizens League Board member
Rochester, MN
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 2:18 PM | Comments (0)
February 17, 2010
Public Input vs. Authentic Involvement
Rich Harwood on the difference between public input and authentic engagement. Ignore the cheesy musical intro, this is good.
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:15 AM | Comments (0)
February 10, 2010
Inter-Generational Roundtable Series Continues into 2010
Our blog comes today from Nick Banovetz, member of the Emerging Leaders Committee.
January 27, 2010, commenced the 2010 Inter-Generational Roundtable Series. The series is a fresh way to offer opportunities for conversations between Citizens League members from different generations -- we're engaging folks on the topics most important to Minnesota.
At the kick-off, some 30 individuals helped evaluate the one-year-old program that promotes dynamic roundtable discussions. We also explored topic ideas for 2010. The dossier is now PACKED, slated for conversations on such topics from how the current census will impact Minnesota's political landscape and economy to what politics should/need to do to keep up with the sophistication of social media.
As you may know, series typically features distinguished Minnesota leaders paired with younger professionals; however, this year we plan to flip-flop one event, bringing in a representative of the younger generation as the distinguished guest for some of the Citizens League's more tenured members.
In 2009, more than 100 Minnesotans participated in the various dialogues (not bad, considering we cap attendance), and we are enthusiastic to see this number continue to climb in 2010. I hope to see familiar -- and new -- faces in the coming months. Feel free to email me with ideas for future programming.
Nick Banovetznbanovetz[at]psbpr.com
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:07 AM | Comments (0)
February 4, 2010
Citizens League transportation advancement
As work on the Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) continues through the expansion of MnPASS and the establishment of a more rapid bus transit option along I-35W and Cedar Avenue, it is important to note the other elements of the UPA and the larger transportation policy agenda of the Citizens League as we form a transportation "advancement group."
In addition to pushing for more transparent pricing of solo driving linked to transit improvements, the Citizens League also remains involved in the eWorkplace Initiative which is also part of the UPA.
In addition to the initiatives spurred by the $190 million in federal and state money that funded the UPA, the Citizens League also was involved in pushing for the Value Capture study at the University of Minnesota, which examines ways that beneficiaries of transportation investments could pay more directly for the benefits received.
The Citizens League transportation advancement group will monitor these and other developments and look for opportunities to further advance the Citizens League transportation policy agenda. If you are interested in the advancement group, email Annie Levenson-Falk at alevensonfalk[at]citizensleague.org.
Posted by Bob DeBoer at 2:01 PM | Comments (0)
February 2, 2010
We Need a Change for Judicial Selection
This year, the Citizens League, as part of the Coalition for Impartial Justice, is supporting a constitutional amendment that would change the system for selecting judges in Minnesota. At Monday's Mind Opener, we heard from Bar Association president Leo Brisbois and Supreme Court Justice Barry Anderson about why this reform is needed and what it would do. Here's a summary:
The current system
The state constitution provides for election of judges, but about 90% of judges are initially appointed by the Governor before facing reelection. This is the result of a quiet consensus among judges and lawyers that the appointment process is generally better at choosing qualified judges, because voters usually have so little information about judicial candidates. (When was the last time you felt like informed about the judicial candidates on your ballot?) Retiring judges usually leave in between terms, so that their replacements are initially named by appointment before coming up for either a contested -- or more usually unopposed -- election.
Nationally, Minnesota's judiciary ranks second in competence and fifth in impartiality and has historically enjoyed a good reputation for fairness and independence.
So if it's working well, why the push for change?
More and more states are seeing expensive, negative campaigns in judicial races, places like Texas, Ohio, California, and Wisconsin. Eventually, this trend will reach Minnesota, and we have a lot to lose if even the perception of fairness is lost because of millions in campaign funding from special interests.
In 2002, the US Supreme Court struck down long-held Minnesota requirements that were designed to prevent judges from taking positions on issues they may have to rule on. In Republican Party v. White, a case brought from Minnesota, the US Supreme Court held that states may not prohibit judicial candidates from discussing their political positions. Judicial candidates are now free to campaign on controversial political issues, seek party endorsements, and personally solicit campaign contributions.
What's at stake?
As Justice Anderson described, two things are at stake here:
First is the impartiality of the courts: Judges who had made campaign promises, especially in exchange for financial support, may be less apt to decide cases based on the merits of that individual case and more likely to be influenced by politics or by their supporters.
More importantly, though, is the perception of the court's impartiality. Whether or not expensive campaigns actually influence judges' decisions, said Justice Anderson, an average person looks at this and says, "You've gotta wonder." As money becomes a factor in judicial selection, studies have shown that the public's perception of influence increases, and respect for the courts decreases. Our society is based on a more or less voluntary obedience for the rule of law and the decisions of courts. This is a very dangerous path.
What would that change look like?
This, in a nutshell, is the proposal from the commission led by former Governor Al Quie and supported by the Citizens League and a host of other organizations from all across the political spectrum:
- Judicial vacancies would be filled by appointment by the Governor after recommendations from a judicial selection commission.
- Judges serve set terms then are up for retention elections. In these elections, the judges run on a simple yes or no vote with no opponent. If they are voted out of office, the open seat returns to the Governor for another appointment.
- To help voters be more informed about the candidates, all judges would face performance evaluations. They would be evaluated by a committee of citizens appointed by the Governor, the Legislature, and the Supreme Court, which would publicly report on judges' performance prior to retention elections.
To make this change requires a constitutional amendment. Legislation has been introduced this year (SF 70 and HF 224) to put this question to voters in the fall.
One additional note: Even though Minnesota's, judicial system currently gets high marks, it's important to note that trust in the court system is not equal across Minnesota's racial and ethnic community. As we began to discuss at on Monday, an improved selection process, along with more transparent information about judges, could make a retention election system more meaningful for all communities. Would someone care to comment on that?
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 12:43 PM | Comments (0)
January 21, 2010
Pathways to Prosperity: Recent Committee Work
Recently, the Pathways to Prosperity committee dispersed into several small groups to look at a variety of policies and programs from across the nation and the globe that might hold some promising ideas for re-orienting Minnesota's current system in more effective and efficient ways. We've now come back together as a full committee and had a very rich discussion about several conceptual frames that are showing signs of success. Here are some concepts we are exploring further:
Give incentives directly to families and hold them accountable for specific outcomes. This works well particularly when families are able to work with other families, develop supportive relationships, and learn together. This is in contrast to more traditional services in which funds are given to an institution that then chooses and delivers the services to a person or family.
Provide 'wrap around services.' This has been successful in the educational realm where the mission is to get kids college ready. These programs recognize the importance of helping families with other concerns that get in the way of educational goals, such as chronic health issues, violent crime, or poor housing. Wrap around services require collaboration between different institutions - a geographic effort - and provide a centralized zone in which families can access assistance and can interact with each other. Funding from public, private and non-profit is how many efforts get going and succeed.
Networks among neighbors and mutual aid societies. Whole communities should be engaged in helping their neighbors in times of need. Structures are needed for this. The current system funnels people into government offices where their primary relationship is with a caseworker. We need a system that guides people into interaction with their neighbors so they can build relationships with each other and develop supportive community structures. In such a system people are not just receivers of services they are also givers of support. They become problem-solvers and solution-designers. Accountability to each other is key. We want to explore what kinds of relationships to an obligated group create results - the civic infrastructure.
Our key question: How can we increase, or reallocate, resources, including community resources, for families on an equitable basis that increases choice? Our current system requires all families seeking assistance to 'navigate the line' - a maze of eligibility paperwork and assessments to determine what a family needs and what services they are allowed. Not all families need intensive services and many are capable of making independent choices and managing their own pathway out of poverty.
We are looking for ways to redirect some of the resources from this bureaucracy that not everyone needs, to intervening community-based alternatives that prevent poverty just as much as they ameliorate it. We want to realign incentives with opportunity and independence.
What do you think of these ideas, or what ideas would you recommend this committee explore further?
Posted by janna at 2:06 PM | Comments (0)
January 19, 2010
Judicial Attack Ads from Other States
Here's a collection of some attack ads from judicial election campaigns in various parts of the country (collected by the Justice at Stake campaign).
We should change the way we select judges before we see these kinds of costly, negative campaigns to elect judges in Minnesota.
Join us February 1 to talk with Supreme Court Justice Barry Anderson and Bar Association President Leo Brisbois about how to change the law and minimize the opportunity for these campaigns to taint the impartiality of our courts.
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 10:17 AM | Comments (0)
January 18, 2010
Volunteers Needed for Policy Review and Advancement
We're organizing several policy review and advancement groups now, and we're looking for members to lead and carry out their work.
These groups are organized by member conveners (rather than staff), and are based on existing Citizens League policy positions. They will develop policy statements and bring them to the Policy Advisory Committee, and later to the Board.
The time commitment varies depending on the topic and members' availability. The initial commitment is approximately 2-3 months, and members who would like to stay involved are welcome to do so as advancement efforts continue.
We plan on convening these groups within the next week or two, so sign up now if you're interested sign up now by emailing Annie Levenson-Falk (alevensonfalk[at]citizensleague.org).
- Transportation: Examine and recommend positions regarding value capture; work toward regional transportation solutions based on 2005 report Driving Blind.
- Regional Governance: Help implement the Common Ground process that resulted from the 2008 Regional Policy Conference. Review Citizens League policy and evaluate federal initiatives related to regional governance.
- Education Reforms: Take the work of last year's Policy Review Group, evaluate current reform efforts and position the Citizens League based on past and recent positions. This will include evaluation of federal and state initiatives.
- Energy: Review 2001 Citizens League report on energy. Update and position the Citizens League in today's energy developments.
Some of these groups were available for sign-up last fall. If you signed up at that time, you are still on the list.
If you're interested in participating in any group, please let us know.
Posted by Annie Levenson-Falk at 9:56 AM | Comments (0)
Subscribe to this blog (RSS 2.0). View the archives or view by category →