Dialogue Minnesota: Recent Episodes
Dialogue Minnesota
SPEAKERS
Jim du Bois, James Norwood
Jim du Bois 00:00
Dialogue Minnesota...conversations about the issues that matter to you. I'm Jim du Bois. November 22, 1963, was a typical Friday in the United States. With Thanksgiving celebrated on the following Thursday, many people were looking forward to a short workweek and the upcoming holiday season. But all that changed when President John F. Kennedy was cut down by gunfire in a Dallas motorcade. For the next four days, Americans saw history unfold on their living room televisions. 59 years later, the fascination with the Kennedy assassination continues. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, a conversation with retired University of Minnesota Humanities Professor James Norwood, who has extensively studied the assassination and its aftermath. Professor Norwood, take us back to that day, Friday, November 22, 1963. The presidential motorcade was coming through Dealey Plaza in Dallas. What happened around 1230 Central time in the afternoon?
James Norwood 01:03
Yes, on this occasion, President Kennedy was eager to start his reelection campaign for 1964. He went to Texas expressly to mend some fences. He was not popular as a whole in Texas, but he was warmly greeted by the crowds in the various cities of Texas when he arrived. Now on Friday, the 22nd, he arrived in Dallas, got off the airplane got into the limousine. And these extraordinary crowds greeted him as he moved through the city. One can see the images of the progression of the limousine, the motorcade and really be shocked at the lack of security, the lack of protections that the President had.
Jim du Bois 01:57
Once the President is in Dealey Plaza in his open limousine and shots ring out, why don't you point out where the principal players were at this time in Dealey Plaza and take us through who they were and how they have played a part in the continuing story about the JFK assassination.
James Norwood 02:16
Actually, if you'll permit me to give our audience a kind of tour of the Dealey Plaza site, and we can see some of the eyewitness testimony, where the people were standing, where, what they reported, we might be able to break down this particular question to shed light on not only how many shots were fired, but the direction from which the shots came. Keep in mind that the Warren Commission concluded that Oswald fired three rounds. They all came, of course, from behind the Presidential limousine. Now, one key witness and one of really unimpeachable character is William Newman. Bill Newman and his family were the closest in proximity to the President as the motorcade was lumbering down Elm Street. And William Newman is depicted immediately after the assassination on the ground, as he urged his family to basically take cover hit the ground, and one can actually see photographs of Mr. Newman covering, trying to protect his children. Mr. Newman claimed that he heard shots coming from behind him and sensed the bullets actually whizzing by. That is why he urged his family to duck for cover. Then immediately across the street from Bill Newman, standing in the area of the plaza lawn, this was the eyewitness, Jean Hill. Jean was standing right next to Mary Mormon, who took one of the most famous photographs of the assassination, and in that photograph, we can see Jean's actual position, facing the knoll area and the picket fence. Jean testified before the Warren Commission that she heard four to six shots and that she actually saw the flash of light and a rifle behind the picket fence. If we then turn to Elm Street, two cars behind the Presidential limousine, Senator Yarborough of Texas later testified that he saw a puff of smoke coming from the area of the picket fence, and he actually then smelled the smoke as the limousine and the motorcade proceeded down Elm Street. Yarbrough witnessed that. Directly in front of him was the follow-up car with the Secret Service and two of the most loyal assistants of President Kennedy, Dave Powers and Kenneth O'Donnell. Both Powers and O'Donnell described the event as an ambush as if they were walking into a fusillade of gunshots, certainly more than three. Dave Powers later after seeing the Oliver Stone film, said he got it right in the depiction and recreation of the assassination scene. Then we have S.N. Holland, who's standing up on top of the freeway overpass, it was actually railroad track. And Holland testified that he saw also a large puff of smoke coming from behind the picket fence. Then, immediately after the motorcade had passed, a Dallas police officer, Joe Smith, followed the crowd that was moving up the knoll area. They didn't go to the book depository. The people who were the eyewitnesses generally felt that the bullets were coming from directly in front of the president up in the knoll area. Now, Joe Smith, the officer, went behind the picket fence, and he was in the process of making an arrest on what he thought was a suspicious person who then pulled out ID and claimed that he was a Secret Service agent. Now it turned out there were no secret service agents on the ground in Dealey Plaza. They were all in the motorcade. So, Officer Smith let that gentleman go. The final witness is Ed Hoffman. This gentleman was standing up on the freeway well in back of that first overpass, it's called the Triple Overpass, and he pulled his car over on the freeway and had a bird's eye view behind the grassy knoll area, and Ed Hoffman actually witnessed the shooting from behind the picket fence. He saw a rifle. He saw a man disassemble the rifle. He saw a man in a suit, who then walked away casually, and he actually witnessed the man who was nearly arrested by Officer Smith. Officer Smith may have come close to arresting one of the assassins in the JFK death. Now, the reason I'm spending some time on this is to underscore the importance of eyewitness testimony. Often our physical evidence, in this case, fails us. And that is the case with the endless attempts to try to identify how many shots were fired, looking at the Zapruder film, discussing the ballistics. When all of that fails, we have to rely on eyewitness evidence. Sometimes the eyewitnesses disagree, but in other instances, we can get a consensus of eyewitness testimony. And that is certainly the case in those eyewitnesses who are in Dealey Plaza and can help to identify both the number of shots fired and the all-important question of the direction of the shots
Jim du Bois 08:17
Well, given the testimony of these witnesses in Dealey Plaza, did the law enforcement authorities and, ultimately, the Warren Commission disregard what they reported? Or did they find holes in their stories?
James Norwood 08:31
Well, this really gets us into the whole topic of the Warren Commission, how it came about, what it accomplished, and above all, the process that it used as an investigation. And as it turns out, the incoming President Lyndon Johnson did not want to set up a commission of this order. He was hoping that the FBI could handle the case exclusively. When there was criticism about that approach, LBJ then decided, reluctantly, to form this panel. It was supposed to be a blue-ribbon panel of unimpeachable men who we're going to investigate the case impartially. And so, a week after the assassination, the Warren Commission was formed, and then they convened in early December. This chronology is important because, as it turned out, in that time of several weeks that had elapsed after the assassination, there was no conventional investigation. It was unlike virtually any other crime scene that one can imagine. All of that time that elapsed was crucial in missing important leads. That delayed the process of finding out really what happened. That first-day evidence, much of that, obviously, and tragically was lost. Then in the commission itself, certainly one of the key members of the commission, and actually, the first name that came to the mind of Lyndon Johnson was that of Allen Dulles. Now, Allen Dulles was the former head of the CIA, who was fired by President Kennedy after the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion when he first acceded to the presidency. Dulles was fired and in disgrace. After that event, JFK vowed that he was going to reevaluate the status of the CIA. And so, to put Allen Dulles on the commission was a curious choice. At the very first meeting of the Warren Commission, Dulles informed the other commissioners that the outcome of their investigation would undoubtedly show that the assassination was committed by a lone gunman because that's the way all of the other assassinations of American presidents were committed. Of course, he didn't note that in the Lincoln assassination, eight people were convicted of being involved in a plot to kill President Lincoln, four of whom were eventually tried and executed for the death of Lincoln. But from the outset, it was clear that the Warren Commission was starting on the premise that Lee Harvey Oswald was guilty. He sat in his perch on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, fired off three shots. One of the shots missed the president and the limousine as a whole, actually wounding a bystander, James Tag, and the other two bullets did the damage to both Governor Connolly and President Kennedy. Now, the Warren Commission did its work. It called its witnesses. And as you were asking, a number of the witnesses who presented views that opposed the position of three shots, one lone gunman firing from the back, those witnesses were often discounted. But you still can read in Warren Commission testimony of people like Jean Hill, who are claiming that she heard four to six shots. But many witnesses were simply not called by the Warren Commission when their views opposed the foregone conclusions of the Commission. It was especially in the investigation of Oswald that the Warren Commission attempted to devise a profile. And so, if one reads the Warren report, it's a pseudo biography of Oswald, trying to very, in a very difficult manner, come to some sort of motivation about why he would kill the president.
Jim du Bois 13:06
Let's focus for a moment on Lee Harvey Oswald. He was a suspect almost from the beginning. Who was Lee Harvey Oswald, and why was he so early on looked upon as the sole suspect in the Kennedy assassination?
James Norwood 13:20
Well, the reports about Oswald identifying him for a subject, as the suspect, begin within an hour of the assassination. And that is very curious because there appears on a list that was typed by one of the Dallas police detectives a list of the employees of the Texas School Book Depository, and at the head of the list was the name Harvey Lee Oswald, not Lee Harvey Oswald but Harvey Lee Oswald. How that name came to be reversed is a subject of great interest because it comes out in the 1970s, during the House Select Committee review, that Harvey Lee Oswald was in the files of American intelligence, and so many of the files referred to Lee Harvey Oswald, and other others refer to Harvey Lee Oswald. Jack Rebel, who typed up that list, had met with an army intelligence officer who just happened to be in Dealey Plaza, which was the eventual source for that Harvey Lee Oswald. We then see in some of the earliest press releases references to Harvey Lee Oswald. And so early on, Oswald was the first suspect. He was the only suspect, and there were never any other alternative suspects in this case, despite overwhelming evidence that Oswald did not act alone even if he did involve. The evidence suggests that he never purchased the rifle that he was alleged to use. His images splashed on the cover of Life magazine weeks after the assassination holding the rifle. When he was interrogated, Oswald told the police that that picture was a fabrication. It was his head pasted on someone, on someone else's body. He did not own a rifle. He did not bring a rifle to work. And he actually told the media as he was being paraded in front of the cameras before the Dallas police officers, "I didn't shoot anyone. I'm just a patsy."
Jim du Bois 15:48
Now during the weekend that began on Friday, November 22, when the President was assassinated, there are some other extraordinary events. Probably the most extraordinary was the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald as he was about to be transported out of, I believe, the Dallas Police Headquarters. He was shot by Jack Ruby. Who is Jack Ruby, and why did Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald intersect so fatefully?
James Norwood 16:13
Yes. First, it must be mentioned that there was another murder committed on the day of the assassination, and that was the death of Officer JD Tippit. Tippit was killed also under very murky circumstances. And after he was killed, almost immediately, it was argued that Oswald was the killer of Tippet as well as JFK. Now that murder didn't get investigated either. So, when one studies the Tippit killing, it is also a kind of Rashomon of evidence where one can see conflicting stories, different eyewitness accounts, very confusing forensic evidence, and the actual placement of Oswald in the location at 10th and Patten in the Oak Cliff area of Dallas, when the all of the evidence points to him already been seated in the Dallas theater at that time, the Texas theater on Jefferson Boulevard, suggest that Oswald did not kill Tippet either. Now, the shooting of Oswald occurred on Sunday, it was Sunday morning, following the assassination over the weekend. And it is arguably the first live killing ever shown on American television, where to the horror of the viewers who were following the events the assassination weekend, Oswald was being transferred from the city headquarters of the Dallas Police to the county facility actually right in Dealey Plaza, where it was believed he would be more secure, ironically. So, the transfer took place on Sunday morning. And as Oswald was being protected, at least in the security of approximately 70 Dallas police officers, a nightclub owner by the name of Jack Ruby entered, somehow got into the basement, stepped forward, and shot Oswald in the stomach. Oswald was then transferred to Parkland Hospital, the same hospital where JFK was taken and pronounced dead. And it was there that Lee Harvey Oswald was pronounced dead as well from the shot from Jack Ruby. Ruby is a shadowy figure whose background, if we trace it very carefully, shows ties to the American government. He was a known FBI informant going all the way back to the time of Richard Nixon and the House Un-American Activities Committee in the late 1940s. He was a gun runner in the employ, obviously, of the CIA, and running guns to Cuba. And so there are many unanswered questions about Jack Ruby.
Jim du Bois 19:26
After the Warren Commission report came out, there were subsequent reports that came in later years, for example, the Clark Panel, Rockefeller Commission, the Church Committee, and the House Select Committee On Assassinations. What did these subsequent investigatory bodies reveal or perhaps even contradict from the Warren report?
James Norwood 19:46
This is an important topic, and to study those stages of the assassination, inquiry, and the aftermath is extremely instructive because each one of those investigatory bodies eventually uncovers new and important information about the assassination. So, it's worth our while to have that timeline, the chronology, of all the new things that we learn decade by decade in the various investigations. A turning point really is one that's not a government investigation but a personal and private investigation by Jim Garrison, the district attorney in New Orleans, because he really sparked a new interest in the case in the late 1960s, when he formally charged, arrested and charged one man that he thought was complicit in the assassination of JFK. The Garrison trial then unfolded, and Clay Shaw, who was put on trial, was acquitted by the jury, who, after the case was over, said that Garrison had made a very strong case that there was a plot to kill the president, they just couldn't find conclusively that there was evidence against Clay Shaw. The key issue on which Garrison's case revolved was that Clay Shaw was associated with the CIA. He denied that on the witness stand. Garrison was able to, unable to provide definitive proof. But years later, due especially to the House Select Committee in the 1970s, the truth came out that Clay Shaw was, in fact, associated with the CIA. So, the Garrison trial was significant as a turning point. It then led, especially in the wake of Watergate, to more accountability from government, that led to the Rockefeller Commission, the House Select Committee on Assassinations. And then in the 1990s, the ARRB, the Assassination Records Review Board that came about due to the effect of Oliver Stone's JFK film, and then unsealed files, released new documents for the public and conducted key interviews that were especially revealing to shed new light on the case. So, we now have so much information that it's possible to pull it together and understand what happened in the death of President Kennedy.
Jim du Bois 22:38
Why do you think people of all ages, of all generations, remain so fascinated with the Kennedy assassination?
James Norwood 22:45
Well, one reason certainly is that we do not have closure yet on this subject. And no matter what the degree of expertise or knowledge, people get involved in this a little and realize that there is just so much confusion and contradictory evidence that it's an incomplete episode in our nation's history. Another important fact is that of the significance of the event itself, what a turning point it was in our nation's history. Keep in mind that on the Monday following the assassination, a major policy of our nation had changed. And that was our commitment to the war in Vietnam. JFK was ready to withdraw the advisors. He had formulated a plan to bring back 1000 advisors by the end of ‘64 and to completely end any involvement of America, in Vietnam, by 1965. All of that changed with the incoming president, Lyndon Johnson, and it happened almost instantly over the assassination weekend. And so, Dan Rather, the CBS commentator, said famously that on Tuesday, Americans went back to work, and we went back on our course as Americans. Well, the course of America did change on that date because the Pentagon had already concluded that the draft was going to be increased and that we had to anticipate approximately 50,000 casualties of American military in the commitment to Viet Nam. So our history radically changed with that event. It was a turning point. And in studying the assassination, it sheds light on the entire evolution of our nation. It's also important, I think, to study this topic because of the actual legacy of President Kennedy. This was a man who is interested in looking at diplomacy as a main way to solve the world's problems as opposed to necessarily military engagement. He had developed plans for detente with Khrushchev in the Soviet Union, with Castro in Cuba, kinds of approaches that anticipated what would not come until the 1980s with Mikhail Gorbachev and his policy of Glasnost. And even in Africa, even today, John F. Kennedy is celebrated as a great liberator, someone who championed the nationalism of African nations and actually championed Arab nationalism in the Arab states, especially Egypt. So, it's worth our while to understand the man and his legacy that really marks a watershed in our history in the last half-century.
Jim du Bois 25:48
Professor James Norwood, thank you so much for joining us.
James Norwood 25:51
Thank you, Jim. It was a pleasure.
SPEAKERS
Jim du Bois, Kathryn Pearson
27:28
Jim du Bois 00:00
Dialogue Minnesota...conversations about the issues that matter to you. I'm Jim du Bois. Election Day was this past Tuesday, but we're still awaiting the results of several key races which will decide which party will control Congress. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson joins us with an election analysis. Professor Pearson, welcome back to dialogue Minnesota.
Kathryn Pearson 00:28
Thank you, Jim. Great to be here.
Jim du Bois 00:30The anticipated red wave did not materialize on election night. Did the results on Tuesday surprise you at all?
Kathryn Pearson 00:38
Yes, they did. Political scientists have studied midterm elections extensively. And given the fact that Democrats hold the White House, and President Biden's popularity is pretty low hovering in the low 40s. The expectation was based on economic forecasting models and sort of understanding these fundamentals, that Republicans would pick up many House seats. And while Republicans did pick up House seats, the gains are clearly not as extensive as expected, as Republicans haven't yet reached that 218 magic number and the Senate is still too close to call. And usually, in wave election years, competitive races and state legislatures and for the governor's office all go toward the party that does not occupy the White House. And that just didn't happen on election night.
Jim du Bois 01:28
While many media outlets jumped on the story that Republicans didn't do as well as expected, it seems increasingly likely, as you said, that they will retake the House, and the Senate remains in play. Are the Democrats perhaps a bit premature in celebrating the midterms as a success for the party?
Kathryn Pearson 01:47
In some ways yes, in some ways no. Nationwide, if you sort of add up the state legislative races and the governor's races, it definitely was a better night for Democrats than anyone expected. But you're absolutely right, it looks very likely that Republicans will take control of, majority party control of the House of Representatives, which will mean that President Biden's agenda will hit many roadblocks going forward. Democrats won't be able to use, for example, the reconciliation process to pass major legislation as they have during the past few years. But four states went solidly Democratic, Minnesota, Michigan, Maine, Maryland. So Democrats did have a better night than expected. There's no doubt about that.
Jim du Bois 02:32
In what areas of the country did Republicans do well, and where did Democrats do well?
Kathryn Pearson 02:38
Republicans did extremely well in Florida and New York. If you look at statewide races, if you look at pickups in House seats, I think it is possible that the pickups in Florida and New York alone will be enough to give Republicans majority party control of the House when all the ballots are counted. We'll see. But those are two states where Republicans did extremely well. And Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, won quickly and easily on election night, and that was a big victory for him in his own governor's race, but it was probably a bigger victory for him as he thinks about his position going into the 2024 elections.
Jim du Bois 03:19
What victories or upsets surprised you the most on election night?
Kathryn Pearson 03:24
Well, I was not thinking that the DFL would enjoy unified party control in St. Paul in January. So clearly, it's very narrow. And we knew that whoever won the margins would be narrower, but for the DFL to retake the Minnesota Senate and to maintain the House, and to win all four statewide races, particularly the governor's race by the margin that Walz had was a bit of a surprise. Minnesota is a state that leans Democratic, but yet in a year that's good for Republicans, I expected the statewide candidates to be more competitive. And I thought that the Democrats’ best hope was to maintain control of the House, but I wasn't thinking that they would regain the Senate. So, that was certainly surprising. The fact that Republican Congresswoman Lauren Bobert, that race has not been called, she's narrowly ahead in Colorado, that is a solidly Republican district. So, you know, there were some surprises like that on election night. But the bottom line is, in many states, Democrats and Republicans are pretty evenly and narrowly divided. And so the fact that there's so many competitive races and so many that haven't been called, at some level really isn't that surprising.
Jim du Bois 04:43
Was election night a good night for first-time candidates and challengers, or was it a better night for incumbents?
Kathryn Pearson 04:50
I think overall, it was a better night for incumbents. If you look to Wisconsin, for example, again, a state where Democrats and Republicans are pretty evenly divided. Governor Evers, the incumbent, hangs on his position as governor, but yet Republican incumbent Ron Johnson holds on to his US Senate seat. So their incumbents did pretty well. That's not to say that there weren't some surprises, both in congressional races and other races looking at incumbents who were defeated. But by and large, the incumbency advantage does appear to have helped candidates in tight races.
Jim du Bois 05:31
There's still likely a lot of data to suss out from exit polls, but from what you've seen so far, what issues were most important to voters this year?
Kathryn Pearson 05:41
Well, we know the economy was important. We know inflation was important. But we also know that abortion was important. And although it never topped the economy and inflation in polls, the fact that it regularly showed up in polls is a change from the past. And of course, that is due to the Dobbs decision back in June, and DFL candidates talked a lot about abortion. And I think that issue really motivated the Democratic base to come out and vote. We saw in the states that had initiatives about abortion that all of the states that had abortion on the ballot, passed an initiative at the statewide level to maintain abortion rights.
Jim du Bois 06:23
Since he emerged as the Republican presidential front-runner in 2016, former President Trump has been a powerful and often divisive force in the GOP. How did the candidates who aligned with Trump or had his endorsement fair on Tuesday night?
Kathryn Pearson 06:40
Not very well, and that narrative has definitely been one that has been repeated many times since Election Night that former President Trump's candidates did not perform as anticipated. JD Vance, the Republican candidate for Senate in Ohio was certainly a notable exception. He won, he won easily early on election night. But if you look at Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania, President Trump's endorsement of Oz likely helped him win that Republican primary, and then he lost decisively on election night. And Pennsylvania is a state that a Republican could have won if it had been a different Republican who would run a better campaign. So that was clearly a failure for the former president. And then in Arizona, the president endorsed Kari Lake, a 2020 election denier, as governor in Arizona, and that race is still too close to call. But certainly, his endorsement did not help Republicans in Arizona.
Jim du Bois 07:37
Well, as you mentioned, Governor Ron DeSantis handily won reelection, and Tuesday was a good night for Republicans in the state of Florida. Did this win give DeSantis a boost for a presidential run in 2024?
Kathryn Pearson 07:50
Yes, there's no question that now DeSantis, he was always going to be a contender, but his win in what used to be considered a swing state definitely gives him an advantage going into the nominating contests. Now, how that will translate in terms of endorsements and money is too soon to tell. But there's no doubt that the narrative coming out of the 2022 midterms is that DeSantis really helped Republicans in Florida, and Trump contributed to some key Republican offices across the country.
Jim du Bois 08:23
Well, neither DeSantis nor Trump have formally announced their candidacy for the GOP nomination for president in 2024. But given the current situation, do you see a coming showdown between Trump and DeSantis as likely?
Kathryn Pearson 08:38
Yes, I do. And we're already seeing it play out with the former president insulting DeSantis, and sort of clearly realizing that if the former president does announce on November 15, as many anticipate, he says he has an important announcement that they will be quite competitive if they indeed both run.
Jim du Bois 09:03
Turning to the Minnesota races, Trump endorsed Dr. Scott Jensen for governor and Kim Crockett for Secretary of State, both of whom lost. What does this say about President Trump's influence on the GOP in Minnesota?
Kathryn Pearson 09:17
Well, significantly, he endorsed them very late in the race. And so unlike some of these other races that we're talking about, his endorsement was not key to their primary win, for example, and neither candidate really touted the former president's endorsement very much, sort of, I think realizing that in Minnesota, it would not help them with independent voters. But it does say that President Trump is not popular in Minnesota. I mean, he's lost Minnesota twice, by a greater margin in 2020, of course, but it does speak to some of the the factions and the divides within the Republican Party. We saw those divides play out at the Republican convention. And I think that less extreme Republican candidates statewide would have likely done better. I don't know that they would have won, the margin of victory for Governor Walz and Secretary of State Steve Simon were pretty substantial. But I don't think that the Trump style will do well in Minnesota. Many elections have shown that.
Jim du Bois 10:20
The Democrats have a split in their party between progressives and moderates. How would you compare the performance of progressive Democratic candidates versus moderates on Tuesday night?
Kathryn Pearson 10:30
Well, it really depends which districts we're talking about. So for example, Congresswoman Angie Craig from Minnesota Second District is a moderate, and she campaigns and governs as a moderate, and she defeated her challenger, Tyler Kistner, by a bigger margin than people were anticipating. This was a rematch for them. She had also defeated him in 2020. On the other hand, progressive Democrats in Minnesota, for the most part, won their seats quite easily as well. And so a lot of the differences really have to do with the districts that they, that they represent, and by and large, moderates tend to represent swing districts, and so it's harder for moderates. But moderates in the DFL did, did pretty well on election night. There was a surprise that Mary Murphy, a long-serving incumbent, a moderate DFL'er in the in the statehouse lost, but nonetheless, DFL'ers did pretty well on election night in Minnesota. After the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, many predicted that women would be motivated by this decision. Was there a strong turnout by women in this election who were energized by the abortion issue, and did they tend to vote for Democrats? Yes, the answer to both those questions is yes. Since 1980, there has been a gender gap in the electorate, where women are more likely to identify as Democrats and vote for Democrats than men are. The source of that gender gap by and large is actually not disagreement over abortion. The source of the gender gap overall is a disagreement over the size of government and the role of government. Having said that, I think this election cycle was a little bit different in terms of motivation, that women were motivated to come, to come to the polls. You know, that said, we'll, we'll look at the final exit polls as they and the results as they continue to trickle in. But partisan differences above all else sort of explain differences on positions on abortion, but women are more likely to identify as Democrats and to support abortion rights.
Jim du Bois 12:41
How did women candidates for both parties fair in this election? Was any progress made toward creating a more gender-balanced Congress?
Kathryn Pearson 12:50
No, in fact, the number of women will go down in the 118th Congress. There are caveats in that many of the races haven't been called. But, but it looks like the number of women in the US Congress, in the US House, will go down pretty significantly. So far, there's a drop among women in both parties. And that's not necessarily because women are more likely to lose, although some prominent women in the House have lost such as Elaine Luria in Virginia. But just the numbers of new women running weren't high enough to bring in a new cohort of women. And then many women have also retired.
Jim du Bois 13:29
We talked about a potential Trump versus DeSantis showdown for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination. On the Democratic side, we don't know yet if President Biden will run for re-election. And some Democrats are hinting that Biden may not be the party's best choice for 2024. What signals did this election send to Democrats who may be thinking about seeking their party's nomination in 2024?
Kathryn Pearson 13:54
Wow, that is, that's a tough question. And I think Democrats will certainly be looking to the Republican Party to see what they're doing because I think that many Democrats actually do think that Biden would be the best choice to run against former President Trump. But I think it's less clear that he would be the best choice to run against a Governor DeSantis. And so, the other question, of course, that is complicated for Democrats is if not, not Biden, then who would be the best choice? And that is not particularly clear. And so, after the 2016 election, Democrats were looking, first and foremost, to the most electable candidate. I don't know that Joe Biden sort of generated the most enthusiasm among Democrats. But Democrats were enthusiastic about him because they thought that he offered the best chance of defeating President Trump, which indeed he did. And that calculation will certainly be on their minds as they think about 2024. There are obviously a lot of talented Democratic senators who could get in the mix. But I think a key question for Democratic actors and those who donate money and endorse would be, you know, would any of these candidates be more electable in a general election than President Biden? And I don't know the answer that.
Jim du Bois 15:10
In Minnesota there was definitely not a red wave on election night. In his concession speech, GOP gubernatorial candidate Scott Jensen said a blue wave had actually swept through the state on Tuesday, with all the Democratic incumbent constitutional officers winning their races. The DFL also held on to its House majority and picked up the Senate. Was Jensen's characterization of a Minnesota blue wave accurate?
Kathryn Pearson 15:35
I don't know that I would call it a blue wave. There is no doubt that it was a surprisingly good night for the DFL in Minnesota. But if we were truly to see a wave, that would have meant that DFL candidates won in every competitive legislative election, and we did not see that happen. There were many competitive elections where Republicans indeed won. But Democrats just won a surprising number of them, enough to maintain their majority in the House and take the majority in the Senate. And then, of course, the statewide candidates all won, even if two of them did win narrowly.
Jim du Bois 16:09
With the Democrats in full control in Minnesota now, what do you expect Governor Walz will try to accomplish in the 2023 legislative session?
Kathryn Pearson 16:18
Well, I think there are a lot of Democrats that are likely already making demands on, on Governor Walz. A $9 billion surplus, which is really extraordinary. Democrats and Republicans got close to a compromise on that surplus in the last session. And I suspect that Democrats are breathing a sigh of relief that they didn't reach a compromise, and Republicans are not happy about that. It was surprising at the time. Perhaps some thought that Republicans were strategically waiting until they may have enjoyed majority party control of both legislative chambers, which obviously did not happen. So, I think Democrats will feel a lot of pressure to spend additional funds on education, on sort of health and human services, on the environment. Also to legalize marijuana, that's been an issue that has long been discussed. And so, I think that there will be just a lot of issues sort of coming to the forefront, some that were worked out in the last session, and some that will be new. And obviously, Democrats are in a great position in Minnesota. That said, the majorities are extraordinarily narrow. And so, in order to pass this legislation, they'll need every vote in the Senate and nearly every vote in the House. And so, compromises within the party will still need to be made. I'm sure there'll be some effort to reach out to some Republicans as well. But in this polarized era, I'm not sure how that will go.
Jim du Bois 17:49
It looks like the GOP will control the US House of Representatives. What does this mean for Minnesota Republicans? I'm thinking in particular, of Sixth District Congressman Tom Emmer. Will he perhaps have a more prominent position within the party, assuming the GOP takes control of the House?
Kathryn Pearson 18:08
And that is a great question. So before the election, a lot has a lot was made about the fact that Emmer is one of three Republicans who would be vying for the position of Republican Whip. And so that is, you know, a senior leadership position, and Emmer seems well positioned to do so. He has been the chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee. So, in other words, in charge of Republican House candidates, recruiting funding, sort of getting the party to victory, and certainly regaining majority party control is a lot to celebrate. On the other hand, House Republicans did not have the night that they were anticipating. The gains are not certainly not as large as anticipated. And so, I'm not sure how costly that will be to Emmer in the battle. He's clearly well respected by his Republican colleagues and well positioned to be in the leadership, but the thinking was that the election would be a big victory for him. And although it still seems like it will be a victory, I don't know that it will be quite as big as he was anticipating or how that will affect us leadership bid.
Jim du Bois 19:16
The midterms are often positioned by the media and political pundits as a referendum on the president or the party in power. Do you think the issues that were of concern for Minnesota voters mirrored those of voters nationwide or were there specific local issues that drove Minnesota voters to the polls?
Kathryn Pearson 19:34
I think this was a very nationalized election, both in Minnesota and across the country. Minnesotans, the candidates and voters alike, were talking about the economy. They were talking about inflation. They were talking about crime. And they were talking about abortion. And those are the same issues that candidates were talking about nationwide. Now, that doesn't mean that, you know, when some of the legislative candidates were door knocking, they were not also mentioning issues specific to their legislative districts and communities and neighborhoods. But the elections were really very nationalized.
Jim du Bois 20:06
Incumbent DFL Attorney General Keith Ellison held on to his seat by about a 20,000 vote margin, much tighter than other state races where incumbent DFL constitutional officers defeated their GOP challengers. Does Ellison's comparative underperformance on Tuesday night signal that Minnesotans split their ballots between party lines in this particular race?
Kathryn Pearson 20:30
Well, that is always sort of the the narrative is that Minnesotans like to split their ticket. But if you actually look at the votes, I mean, most partisans still voted straight party line. But it didn't take that many Minnesotans to either slit their tickets or to drop off, in other words, vote for the top of the ticket but not some of the, the other races, such as Ellison's, to produce this result. So, the vast majority of Minnesotans probably voted straight party line, but enough supported Walz and not Ellison to create this difference.
Jim du Bois 21:05
The Georgia Senate race will not be decided until after a runoff between Democratic incumbent Raphael Warnock and GOP challenger Herschel Walker. That's because neither candidate received over 50% of the vote on Election Day, and according to Georgia law, such an election has to go to a runoff. A Libertarian Party candidate received just over 2% of the vote. Let's talk about the role of third parties in this election. Did any make a significant showing, or do many of them simply play the role of spoiler for a major party candidate?
Kathryn Pearson 21:37
By and large, they play the role of spoiler, and that is particularly true in the two states that require a runoff if neither party's candidate gets to that 50% plus one margin. Minnesota obviously does not have that rule; otherwise, we'd be going to a runoff for some of these races. So, third-party candidates, you know, in those states really affect the outcomes, but they can affect the outcomes in other places as well if voters are voting for a third-party candidate instead of one of the two major party candidates, even if you know absent the third-party candidate, they would have voted for them. But what we don't know about third-party candidates is whether or not the voters who support them would just not vote in that race otherwise or if they would give their vote to someone else. The other way in which third-party candidates are affecting the race is they encourage voters to talk about their issues. Certainly, the presence of the marijuana candidates, I think, really prompted Democrats to keep talking about the legalization of marijuana to try to ensure that third-party candidates didn't siphon support from them.
Jim du Bois 22:45
So far, it seems that candidates from both parties have been fairly gracious losers. They have made concession speeches where they acknowledged that they lost the election. They congratulated their opponent. Do you think this is a trend perhaps that we might see some of this election denialism go away in this, following this cycle, or is this an anomaly?
Kathryn Pearson 23:12
I certainly hope it's a trend. It has been a great relief to see the losers concede. It seems striking to have to say that, but at this particular point, it has been a real relief to see so many candidates who have lost, including those who have denied the results of 2020, concede their own races. Now, we'll see what happens in Arizona with gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake in that very close election. She has made false allegations about Arizona election workers. So, we'll see what happens there.
Jim du Bois 23:46
There are several outstanding elections, not just in Congress, but also at the state level and even the local level. A few that come to mind, two in particular. One is the gubernatorial race in Oregon, where there's a very tight race between the Democratic and the Republican candidates. If by chance the governor's seat in Oregon would flip to the GOP, that'd be the first time in 40 years that a Democrat has not held that seat in Oregon. We're also seeing something rather interesting playing out in Los Angeles, the mayoral race, where there is a billionaire businessperson challenging the Democrat, and that race is coming down to the wire as well. Do you think in those particular locations, and maybe we tie in a third one here, we know that in the suburbs surrounding New York City, there was a swing to the GOP as well. So, if we look at Los Angeles, New York, and at the state level in Oregon, we've had obviously some crime issues in the Portland area. Do you think crime may be weighing on these particular races and might be one of the reasons why more voters tacked to a GOP candidate in areas that are normally considered pretty safe for Democrats?
Kathryn Pearson 25:00
I do. I mean, I think all of the issues are still in the mix, and the fact that the election fundamentals still favored Republicans because President Biden occupies the White House and is not very popular and the economy is struggling, so all those things still matter. But yes, I do think crime had a particular impact on some of these races.
Jim du Bois 25:20
Let's talk about some of the demographics coming out on the exit polls. We did hear that younger voters showed up in greater numbers than was anticipated. And also some interesting trends, I think an AP poll was indicating that more younger Blacks tacked to the GOP in the midterm elections. We also know there was some loss of Latino voters to the GOP, too. Normally Latino voters have been pretty loyal to the Democratic Party. Do you think it's a little too early to try and draw any conclusions about whether these trends will continue? And should the Democrats be concerned, especially with the potential loss of two bases that have been a very important part of the party's support?
Kathryn Pearson 26:06
I think overall when looking at younger voters, Democrats should be encouraged. Because the youngest age group, whether it's 18 to 25, or 18 to 29, however you parse it out, is the most Democratically inclined age cohort in the country. And political science tells us that partisan identification for most voters is actually fairly stable. So, to the extent that younger voters are voting democratic, those voters will likely continue to vote Democratic. Now, turnout was greater than anticipated among younger voters, but it was still lower than every other age cohort. So, Democrats are well aware of this and really tried to mobilize younger voters because of this issue. And we actually, I think, you know, same-day registration states likely will see a larger turnout of younger voters because younger voters are the most residentially mobile. And so, in general, I think Democrats are encouraged by the vote choices of younger voters but really need to not take them for granted, especially as they're harder to mobilize to turn out.
Jim du Bois 27:17
Kathryn Pearson is an associate professor of political science at the University of Minnesota. Professor Pearson, thanks again for joining us on Dialogue Minnesota.
27:26
My pleasure, Jim. Great to be with you.
SPEAKERS
Jim du Bois, Kathryn Pearson
25:02
Jim du Bois 00:00
Dialogue Minnesota...conversations about the issues that matter to you. I'm Jim du Bois. The midterm elections are a couple of days away, and the stakes for both the Democratic and Republican parties are high since control of Congress hangs in the balance. At the state level, all 201 Minnesota legislators and our constitutional officers are up for election. University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson joins us for a look at where things stand as voters prepare to go to the polls on Tuesday. Professor Pearson, welcome back to Dialogue Minnesota.
Kathryn Pearson 00:38
Thank you, Jim. It's great to be with you.
Jim du Bois 00:40
The midterm elections take place on Tuesday, November 8. Many see this year's midterms as a referendum on Joe Biden's presidency. There's a long-standing pattern in American politics where the party controlling the White House loses congressional seats in the midterms. What are some of the reasons why it is so hard for the party in power to maintain its numbers in Congress?
Kathryn Pearson 01:03
That's right. Over the last century, there have only been three midterm elections where the president's party has actually picked up a few seats in Congress. In every other cycle, the President's party has lost seats in the House, usually, on average, about 30 seats. The losses are fewer in the Senate. The Senate is more variable because only a third of the seats are up. But typically, two years is not enough time for the President to get a lot done and to really make a mark so that voters are enthusiastic about the President's performance. And in the case of President Biden, his approval ratings have hovered in the low 40s. And so, that really makes it difficult for Democrats in this particular midterm cycle. We have high inflation, people are pessimistic about the economy. And so voters, Republican voters are more enthusiastic about turning out to vote against Joe Biden, even though he's not on the ballot, and vote for Republican candidates. And there is some Democratic enthusiasm caused by the Dobbs Supreme Court decision back in June, but in general, polls are showing that Republicans are more enthusiastic. So, the combination of an unpopular Democratic president and a faltering economy make this midterm cycle particularly challenging for Democrats at every level.
Jim du Bois 02:25
Well, let's talk about what the polls are indicating this year. How close is the battle for the House and the Senate expected to be?
Kathryn Pearson 02:32
Well, the question about the House of Representatives is how many seats do Republicans pick up, not whether or not they will pick up seats. And it seems highly likely that they will pick up many more than the five that they need to regain majority party control of the House of Representatives. And so, having said that, many of the competitive races are very close. And so, if we see a strong Republican tide on election night, Republicans could pick up 20 House seats. If we don't see a strong tide, it could be around 10. So, we really don't know just because so many of the House seats are tossups and so close, but Democrats are defending many more competitive seats than Republicans are in this particular cycle. The US Senate is a trickier question. Of course, only a third of the seats are up. It's currently 50-50. And there are several very competitive races. The electoral cycle definitely benefits Republicans, but Republicans have nominated some candidates in some states that are having a really hard time. I'm thinking about Oz in Pennsylvania and Walker in Georgia. These are two states where a strong Republican candidate would likely have a pretty big lead in these states. But that's not the case, and so these are two states that are very close.
Jim du Bois 03:50
Which gubernatorial races will you'll be watching most closely this election cycle, and do you expect to see any red or blue shifts in these races?
Kathryn Pearson 04:00
Well, even though we're talking about President Biden and the House and Senate, state legislatures and governor’s races are also affected by these national trends. And so, we saw in 2010, when Democrats fared so poorly, losing 63 seats in the House, Democrats also lost many state legislative majorities and several governor's races as well. And so, the top electoral cycle for Democrats sort of affects governor's races as well. Being in Minnesota, I'm, of course very closely watching Minnesota's race. The incumbent DFL Governor Tim Walz has a lead in the polls, but there's no doubt that this tough electoral cycle is making it a competitive race in Minnesota.
Jim du Bois 04:47
In 2016, virtually no major poll predicted that Donald Trump would win the presidency. Why were the polls so off in 2016, and have the issues leading to those inaccuracies been addressed?
Kathryn Pearson 05:01
Well, the polls were off in 2016 because they underestimated support for President Trump. They actually got support for Hillary Clinton, they captured that pretty accurately. But what they didn't capture was support for President Trump, especially in some of those key swing states, like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, because they undercounted, they, they didn't have enough respondents, white men who lived in rural areas without college degrees, who also really shifted from 2012 to 2016 in favor of Republican candidates. Those voters were less likely to respond to polls, and when they did, pollsters did not adjust the polls enough to account for their preferences that went heavily toward Trump because of this shift from 2012 to 2016. So, pollsters are aware of this and are trying to improve the polls. But I think the reality is that it is increasingly difficult to poll in this era, even with you know, many different polling options, whether it's cell phones, or texts, or online polls, it is still difficult to get a representative sample of voters to respond to polls. So, I think we really need to consider polls to be a snapshot in time and not necessarily predictive of election results. The other thing about polls is that we should really look to polls that are aggregated, so taking together instead of just relying on one particular poll, because the power of aggregation of many polls is that they get a more accurate estimate of a snapshot in time, but they don't predict election outcomes. And I think that the media sort of leads us to believe that that's the case. And then voters and candidates and strategists are understandably very frustrated when they're wrong.
Jim du Bois 06:49
When the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade earlier this year, the country saw an uptick in women registering to vote. Polls this summer indicated that many Americans disapproved of the ruling and blamed the Republican Party. Are abortion rights still a significant issue for voters given concerns about inflation, gas prices, the border, and crime to name a few?
Kathryn Pearson 07:12
That question will be easier to answer after election day. But one thing is clear: abortion is a bigger issue in this election than it has been in previous elections. Does that mean that it's as important as the economy, inflation, crime? Not necessarily. But polls suggest that younger voters are very upset by this decision. And it is the case that majorities in most states in America are opposed to the Dobbs decision that overturn Roe v. Wade. But if that decision is not sort of the primary motivating factor in vote choice, then it won't necessarily have the impact that it looked like it might have earlier in the summer. It is also the case that more women did start registering to vote than men after the Dobbs decision, which is interesting because historically, over time, polls have shown that divides on the question of abortion aren't really divides along gender lines, they're divides along partisan lines, or ideological lines, religiosity, those are the types of factors that sort of predict differing opinions on abortion, not so much gender. Typically, equal percentages of men and women sort of support or disapprove of abortion rights, even as a majority of the country tends to be in favor of access to abortion with some restrictions.
Jim du Bois 08:37
We mentioned at the start of the show that the midterms have much to do with the presidency of Joe Biden and how voters view his presidency. But are there local issues that you're seeing in Minnesota this year that are taking center stage?
Kathryn Pearson 08:52
The issues that we're seeing in the ads in Minnesota are, by and large, the same issues that we're seeing nationally. So, Democrats in Minnesota are talking a lot about access to abortion in the wake of Dobbs. Republicans in Minnesota are talking a lot about crime, and they're talking about the economy and inflation. Democrats are talking about the economy as well, sort of making their case about the economy. But these are the same trends that we're seeing nationally, and in general, elections have become much more nationalized. And we saw this in the 2018 midterms with, at that point, a record number of voters voting straight party line, not splitting their ticket, just voting for one party's candidates. And so, even though the races are closely divided here, most voters in Minnesota will vote straight party line.
Jim du Bois 09:46
Minnesota since eight US House members to Washington. Currently, there are an equal number of Democrats and Republicans. Do you expect this balance to change after the midterms?
Kathryn Pearson 09:56
Well, Minnesota's Second District is home to one of the most competitive, expensive House races in the country. And so, it is certainly too close to call at this point. I think it's likely that the other seven incumbents will win in the other seven races. There's, you know, there's a lot of money being spent in Minnesota's First District, so, but with a good year for Republicans, I think that is very likely to stay in Republican hands. But the Second District is just too close to call. It's a toss-up race. Democratic incumbent Angie Craig is running for re-election, has raised millions of dollars. And she's been challenged again by Tyler Kistner, who has not raised as much money as Craig for his campaign, but really benefits from millions of dollars in outside spending from groups running attack ads against Craig. And then Craig is also benefiting from outside money running attack ads against Kistner. So, this is an incredibly close race and incredibly expensive race. And both parties are looking to Minnesota Second District as one of the races that could help determine which party controls Congress or in reality, how big the Republican margin is.
Jim du Bois 11:08
Let's talk a bit more about the First Congressional District which encompasses southern Minnesota. Republican Brad Finstad won the seat this year in a special election to fill a vacancy that was left after Representative Jim Hagedorn passed away. He now faces his Democratic challenger, Jeff Ettinger, who is a former Hormel CEO. Is it still possible for a Democrat to win in a district that has shifted red in the Trump years especially given the fact that Governor Walz had multiple terms in the First District?
Kathryn Pearson 11:38
Right, in the first district. If we were talking about this race in the context of the 2018 midterms where Democrats had a big advantage, I would have said yes, the First District would have been in play in that type of electoral context when that election was a referendum on President Trump, and Democratic enthusiasm back then was so much higher. But in 2022, in the context of a year that heavily favors Republicans, even though Finstad is only a recent incumbent and doesn't have the long-standing advantages that most incumbents have running for reelection, you know, a full two-year term, he is still advantaged as an incumbent and even more so as a Republican in a district that has shifted Republican at the presidential level.
Jim du Bois 12:23
Representative Hagedorn was married to the former chair of the Republican Party of Minnesota, Jennifer Carnahan, who resigned after a federal grand jury indicted a prominent GOP fundraiser on sex trafficking charges. From what you can tell has this scandal affected the Republican Party in Minnesota at all this year?
Kathryn Pearson 12:42
It's not something that voters are talking about necessarily. I think that if somehow Carnahan had been the Republican candidate in the First we'd be hearing a lot more, a lot more about it. But I think in terms of, you know, the party's ability to sort of, you know, maintain cohesion, and not have staff turnover and sort of internal issues It has affected the party. In terms of being an issue for voters that they're talking about, I think this election is so nationalized, and everyone is focused on, you know, the issues of the economy, inflation, crime and abortion, that this is sort of a peripheral concern, if at all, for voters in Minnesota in the cycle.
Jim du Bois 12:42
You had mentioned that it's deja vu in the race in the Second District again this year. One other item interesting about the Second District is back in 2020, there was a third-party candidate on the Legal Marijuana Now ticket who died prior to the election, but his name stayed on the ballot. The same thing has happened again this year. And I guess the question is, how much did the third-party candidate impact the election two years ago? And do you think this will have the potential to throw a wrench into the race again this year?
Kathryn Pearson 13:56
Because this election is so close, a third-party candidate could matter and could be determinative. It, of course, is very sad that Paula Overby has passed away and her name remains on the ballot; she will get fewer votes than she would have, in all likelihood, if she were still campaigning and still alive. But it is definitely possible that voters either who haven't followed the news or who just want to vote sort of symbolically in favor of the legalization of marijuana may still cast their vote for her, just as was the case two years ago. I think the question that's hard to know is if her name were not on the ballot, would those voters have voted for one of the two major party candidates or would they have just you know, voted in the governor's race but not voted in that congressional race at all? And we don't know the answer. I think in such a very close race, it is possible that a third-party candidate could make the difference If some Republican voters, you know, or Democratic voters who feel very strongly about the legalization of marijuana sort of, you know, put their support behind Overby instead of Craig, yes, it could make a difference. But once again, we don't know what those voters have just, you know, passed on voting in the Second District race more generally. So, because it's such a close race, yes, it could make a difference. But it's hard to know at this point.
Jim du Bois 15:27
Let's look at the Minnesota gubernatorial race. Governor Tim Walz has held an early lead in the polls against Republican opponent Scott Jensen. Has Jensen been able to chip away at this lead as we approach the election?
Kathryn Pearson 15:40
Yes, Jensen has absolutely chipped away at Walz's big lead that he enjoyed early on in the cycle. And I think that's for many reasons. The number one reason is that sort of partisans come home. For the most part, strong partisans support their party's candidate. And so, even the Republicans who may not have supported him in the nominating process, are at the end of the day going to support their candidate. I think the real question is the sort of very weak partisans or independents who may or may not vote in a midterm election where turnout is usually about 20 points lower or are still perhaps deciding between two candidates that they may have some issues with. In general, incumbents are advantaged in gubernatorial races, but again, in 2022, Republicans have a huge advantage because of President Biden's low approval ratings. And so I think that Jensen's stance against vaccines is perhaps hurting him among independent voters. I think it's possible that a candidate who had not taken such extreme positions, a Republican candidate who had not taken such extreme positions, would be doing better in the polls than Jensen is right now.
Jim du Bois 16:53
Like many other states, rural Minnesota tends to trend conservative and the metro areas trend liberal. Does this mean the battle for the governor's office will be waged in the suburbs?
Kathryn Pearson 17:04
Because this is such a close race, it really will be waged everywhere. And what I mean by that is that, yes, Walz will win overwhelmingly in the metro. But turnout will be key here. Again, midterm elections are about 20 points lower than presidential years. And so, in order for statewide candidates to do well in Minnesota, they rely on a big turnout in the metro. And so, if the turnout isn't big in the metro, that can be very harmful to DFL candidates. But yes, the suburbs also matter. The margins between Republicans and Democrats are much, much closer in the suburbs. And we see that with the Second District being so competitive. And we see that in the exurbs as well. Democrats, of course, are trying to hold on to a couple of seats, Senate seats in the Iron Range, a seat in St. Cloud, but I think you know, really given how close this race is, the battle is everywhere.
Jim du Bois 17:59
While Governor Walz has maintained a consistent lead in the polls, the race between incumbent Attorney General Keith Ellison and his GOP challenger Jim Schultz is extremely tight. Why is this race so tight for Ellison this time, and of course, back we should mention when he was first elected to the office, the margin was very close back then as well. What headwinds are working against Ellison in this particular election cycle?
Kathryn Pearson 18:26
First off, it's a good year in general for Republican candidates. And then I think the issue of crime. I think that many voters don't have a clear understanding of what the attorney general's office does. And as Schultz is sort of making promises about combating crime, some of these promises are actually outside of the purview of what the attorney general can do. But that's not particularly clear to voters. There's a lot unknown to voters about the office. And so given the fact that crime is such a concern to many Minnesota voters, I think that is definitely hurting Ellison as he is running for reelection. And his race, again, as you mentioned, was narrow four years ago, and that was a year that really favored Democrats. And so, it's not surprising that it is a highly competitive race and one of the closest.
Jim du Bois 19:14
We should also mention that a statewide race the typically attracts very little attention is highly contentious this year. Incumbent DFL State Auditor Julie Blaha is in a tight race with her GOP challenger Ryan Wilson. Blaha is facing criticism because of the massive fraud associated with Feeding Our Futures. How close is this race at the moment?
Kathryn Pearson 19:38
Oh, it's extremely close, both because of the Feed Our Futures fraud that you have brought up, and because once again, it's a good year for Republicans and you know, her incumbency status, we would typically think that would be helpful, but because of the scandal, I think it's actually making it more difficult for her to sort of get her message out. And so, strong Democrats will vote straight party line, strong Republicans will vote straight party line and then in some of these more competitive races there either might be just fall off people not voting, or more independent voters or weaker partisans being willing to cross party lines. for some of these candidates.
Jim du Bois 20:16
Minnesota is one of the few states to have a split legislature. Democrats control the House, Republicans control the Senate. Do you expect this dynamic to change after the midterms?
Kathryn Pearson 20:26
Well, because the divisions are so narrow, and the majority is so thin, really anything is possible. It is certainly possible that Republicans could control both chambers. It is also possible that the current split could continue. I think, I think it would be hard for the DFL to control the State Senate. But again, because these races are so close and so competitive, nothing is impossible, but I think one likely scenario would be the status quo.
Jim du Bois 20:54
In 2020, two major events changed the way many Americans thought about education. First, the pandemic disrupted in-person learning for many students and angered parents on both sides of the aisle. Second, following the aftermath of the murder of George Floyd, many schools reexamined how they teach about race. These two issues have inspired many people to run for local school boards. How do you think these types of very local races and issues are impacting the entire midterm election in terms of the salient issues that voters are concerned about?
Kathryn Pearson 21:31
Well, the nationalization of local school board races is really a troubling trend because it takes attention away from whatever particular issues a school district is sort of wrangling with and imposes national issues in local elections that really may not be relevant to a particular school at all. You know, most K through 12 schools do not teach critical race theory it; you know, it's something that is taught in law schools. It's, you know, discussed among academics. And so, I think some of the examples that are being used are teaching about history and incorporating race to a greater extent in the teaching of US history. But the debate over critical race theory really, sort of if you're thinking about the issues that schools, that most schools are facing, really does not make a lot of sense. But it has mobilized a lot of voters, a lot of candidates. And it's made the electoral environment more challenging for school board races as well. It's sort of taken something which used to be nonpartisan and really focused on whatever particular issues schools were facing and turned it into sort of a national issue with a lot of partisanship and conflict infused and so it's, it's not a good development in terms of thinking about how to best identify and sort of solve problems in local schools.
Jim du Bois 22:59
Many conservative candidates running in local and national races this year have asserted a belief that Joe Biden did not legitimately win the presidency. How is this issue shaping our national and local races?
Kathryn Pearson 23:12
Well, it is it's something that a lot of Republican candidates are repeating as well. And so, it's, it's deeply troubling that the election, which was certified by the secretaries of state of all 50 states, Democrats and Republicans alike, it's just not true, that, that Joe Biden did not legitimately win the election. Of course, he won it legitimately. And so, it's troubling in terms of what it means for future elections. Does this mean that if a candidate doesn't like the result, they'll say that the election was not legitimate? It's troubling as we think about moving forward because who knows what will happen in 2022, 2024 if certain candidates don't like the results.
Jim du Bois 23:59
Do you think local election officials and our voting systems are prepared this year for what many think will be an onslaught of challenges and lawsuits?
Kathryn Pearson 24:09
I think they have been preparing, but it is hard to know if they are prepared given that we don't know exactly what will happen after the election. It is certainly troubling to hear the reports of potential violence at polls, sort of, you know, hostility toward volunteer judges, poll workers, it is deeply troubling. You know, our democracy relies on free and fair elections.
Jim du Bois 24:35
Kathryn Pearson is an associate professor of political science at the University of Minnesota. Professor Pearson, thanks so much for joining us on Dialogue Minnesota.
Kathryn Pearson 24:44
My pleasure. Thank you, Jim.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is sparking outrage throughout the world and uniting the NATO alliance in a manner that has not been seen in decades. But as economic sanctions tighten their grip on Russia, Vladimir Putin is rattling his country’s nuclear saber. University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Mark Bell discusses the situation in Ukraine and Putin’s threats.
It’s been two years since COVID 19 first appeared in the U.S. The pandemic’s impact on the economy is still being felt. Inflation is at a forty-year high, and supply chain issues are frustrating businesses and consumers. Yet, not all of the economic news is dire. University of Minnesota Professor of Economics Timothy Kehoe, who also advises the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, joins us to discuss the state of the economy.
Are you like many of us who resolved to improve our fitness and eating habits in the New Year? Are you having trouble getting started or staying motivated? Personal trainer Brent Goodermont shares tips on how to reach your fitness goals.
Minneapolis voters will choose 13 City Council members and a mayor in the upcoming city election on November 2. There are also 3 city charter amendment questions that would give the mayor more power, create a new Department of Public Safety to replace the police department and impose rent controls. The election is drawing attention far beyond the city’s borders. Hamline University Professor of Political Science and University of Minnesota Visiting Professor of Law David Schultz shares his insights on how the races may play out.
America is a divided nation. A program developed by the University of Minnesota’s College of Liberal Arts called the Public Life Project is designed to encourage civil discussions about controversial issues.
Last month, the US Supreme Court concluded its term and delivered several key decisions. University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law Timothy Johnson analyzes the Court’s rulings and looks ahead to the cases it will hear during the upcoming October term.
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the fitness routines of many Minnesotans. Personal Trainer Brent Goodermont gives us some ideas about getting back on track.
With the arrival of spring comes also the threat of severe weather. Tornadoes, strong winds, lightning and flash flooding pose significant dangers to those who are unprepared and unprotected. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, a conversation with National Weather Service Warning Coordination Meteorologist Todd Krause on how you can stay safe when storms threaten.
It’s been a year since the COVID-19 pandemic upended our lives. How has the economy fared both nationwide and here in Minnesota during this unprecedented period of time? University of Minnesota Professor of Economics Timothy Kehoe provides us with some answers.
February is Black History Month. This is traditionally a time to reflect on key moments in the ongoing struggle for racial equity. But given the events of the past year such as the killing of George Floyd, there is renewed focus on the systemic racism that persists in American society. University of Minnesota Professor of African American and African Studies Keith Mayes joins us to discuss Black History Month in a contemporary context.
Last month, Donald Trump became the first president in US history to be impeached for a second time by the House of Representatives. The single article of impeachment accuses Trump of “inciting an insurrection” at the Capitol on January 6th. Trump’s second Senate impeachment trial gets underway on February 9th. Hamline University Professor of Political Science and University of Minnesota Visiting Professor of Law David Schultz joins us to discuss the issues surrounding this historical and unprecedented event.
Fifty years ago this month, then-DFL Governor Wendell Anderson worked with the conservative-controlled Minnesota Legislature to pass significant fiscal policies that transformed the state’s educational system. Though the process required the longest special session in the state’s history, the bipartisan effort and the commitment to economic and social equality became known as the “Minnesota Miracle.” We take a look at this monumental time in Minnesota’s history and revisit the iconic 1973 Time magazine cover where Minnesota became nationally known as “the state that works.” In today’s bitterly partisan political atmosphere, one wonders if a similar miracle could possibly come together again. On this episode of Dialogue Minnesota, we discuss Governor Wendell Anderson’s legacy, the Minnesota Miracle and what has happened to the miracle in the ensuing decades. Our guest is Tom Berg, a Minneapolis attorney who served as a state legislator from 1971 through 1978. He is the author of the book Minnesota’s Miracle: Learning From the Government That Worked. We spoke with him in 2016 shortly after the book was published.
Several days after the November 3rd elections, the AP and other major news outlets called the presidential race for Joe Biden and his running mate Kamala Harris. President Donald Trump has so far refused to concede. He and some of his supporters are making baseless accusations of widespread election fraud, and his campaign has filed numerous lawsuits in several states challenging the voting process. Control of the US Senate remains in question pending the results of a runoff election in Georgia in early January. Should both Democratic candidates prevail in that election, the Senate would be split 50-50 between the two parties, and Vice President-Elect Harris would cast the deciding vote. University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson joins us to discuss the election results both nationally and here in Minnesota.
Given the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and the focus on racial inequities in the wake of police shootings of African Americans, this is a political campaign season unlike any other in recent memory. With about a week remaining before the election, it’s time to check in with University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson on where things stand in the final stretch of the campaigns.
The death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg leaves a vacancy on the Supreme Court that the Trump administration hopes to fill quickly. Federal Judge Amy Coney Barrett is the president’s nominee to replace Justice Ginsburg, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says the confirmation hearings will start on October 12th. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, a look at the legacy of Justice Ginsburg and the future of the Supreme Court. We’re joined by Timothy Johnson, the Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law at the University of Minnesota who is an expert on the Supreme Court.
In our last episode, we explored the ascendency of a law and order candidate who defeated his major party opponents in the 1969 Minneapolis mayoral election. Charles Stenvig was a Minneapolis Police lieutenant who ran as an independent, promising to crack down on civil disobedience and crime by—as he described it—"taking the handcuffs off of the police.” Minneapolis had experienced racial unrest during the summers of 1966 and 1967, protests against the Vietnam War were taking place at the University of Minnesota in the late 1960s, crime was on the rise and voters were uneasy. Into this tableau came Stenvig whose victory challenged the widely accepted notion that Minneapolis was a liberal and progressive city. Stenvig was reelected to a second term in 1971 as concerns about civil unrest and crime persisted. In this episode, part two of our look at the politics of law and order.
Guests:
Gary Prevost, a retired professor of political science at St. John’s University and the College of St. Benedict, was a student activist on the U of M’s Twin Cities campus during that time.
University of Minnesota Professor of Political Science and African and African American Studies August Nimtz who witnessed the protests.
In the mid-to-late 1960s, Minneapolis—like many cities across the country—experienced racial unrest and student protests over the war in Vietnam. Law and order became a central campaign theme for a Minneapolis Police lieutenant who ran as an independent in the city’s 1969 mayoral race. Charles Stenvig positioned himself as a populist who would “take the handcuffs off the police” and crack down on militants. In a stunning victory, Stenvig defeated both of his major party opponents and challenged the prevailing belief that Minneapolis was a liberal and progressive city. There are many parallels between Stenvig’s political ascension and the current Republican campaign strategy that focuses on crime and civil unrest. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, we present part one of a two-part series on the politics of law and order. We’re joined by Southern Illinois University Professor of Historical Studies Jeffrey Manuel who is the co-author of an article on Stenvig titled “You Can’t Legislate the Heart.”
Last month marked the 100th anniversary of the ratification of the 19th Amendment which granted women the right to vote. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, Augsburg University Professor of History William Green joins us to discuss the complexities of the women’s suffrage movement. He is the author of a book out on the University of Minnesota Press titled “The Children of Lincoln: White Paternalism and the Limits of Black Opportunity in Minnesota.”
This election cycle is like no other in modern U.S. history. The COVID-19 pandemic is tossing traditional campaigning by the wayside and is driving record numbers of voters to cast their ballots by mail in lieu of a polling place. Despite the coronavirus, Minnesota recently held a primary election, Joe Biden virtually accepted the nomination as the Democratic Party’s presidential candidate, and Senator Kamala Harris was named Biden’s running mate. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson joins us to discuss this most unusual campaign season.
Politics and sports have often intersected in modern history, and in recent years, controversial team names and athlete protests during games have garnered much attention. The Washington, DC NFL team recently agreed to change its current name that many find offensive and other sports franchises with names associated with Indigenous Americans are under increasing pressure to do the same. Earlier this month, the Minnesota Wild’s Matt Dumba became the first NHL player to kneel in support of the Black Lives Matter movement during the National Anthem. And the Minnesota Lynx’s Maya Moore sat out another season to advocate for the release of a man whom she believes was wrongly sent to prison. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, a look at how sports became a platform for expressing ideological views and how today’s athletes are using their celebrity to promote racial equity. Joining us is Douglas Hartmann, a professor and chair of the Sociology Department at the University of Minnesota. He is an expert on the sociology of sport.
The COVID-19 pandemic continues to send shock waves through the nation’s economy. With so much volatility and uncertainty, it’s difficult to determine just how much damage the economy has suffered and how long it will take to recover. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, we’re joined by University of Minnesota Professor of Economics Timothy Kehoe. Professor Kehoe is also an advisor to the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank. His opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank or the Federal Reserve System.
50 years ago, the U.S. was awash in civil unrest over the war in Vietnam and racial injustice. This week, we look back at that tumultuous time and focus on the shootings of student protesters at Kent State University by members of the Ohio National Guard in May of 1970. New Mexico State University Professor of History Kenneth Hammond was a student activist at Kent State University at the time and joins us to discuss the incident, its aftermath and the parallels to today’s protest movements.
The Minneapolis City Council is moving forward with a proposed amendment to the city’s charter that would disband the current police department and replace it with a Department of Community Safety and Violence Prevention. Voters will ultimately decide the fate of the council’s proposal in November if it passes some bureaucratic hurdles in the meantime. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Sociology Michelle Phelps discusses systemic racism in our nation’s police departments and what a new vision for law enforcement might look like.
The COVID-19 pandemic is dramatically changing how many of us work. Even the U.S. Supreme Court is working remotely, and for the first time in its history, oral arguments are being live streamed. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science Timothy Johnson joins us to discuss the high court’s move to a digital platform that’s making its proceedings more accessible to the public.
Governor Tim Walz’s stay-at-home order expiries on May 18th. Additional retail businesses will reopen on that day, and other services are slated to resume on June 1st. Polling data in Minnesota and nationwide indicates that a majority of respondents support efforts to contain the spread of the coronavirus through shelter-in-place directives and the closure of businesses and services that are deemed non-essential. A study using cell phone location data initially gave Minnesotans an A grade for their compliance with social distancing, but in recent weeks, that grade has declined to a D. University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Sociology and Law Joshua Page joins us to discuss the reasons why we do or do not comply with governmental directives and the advice of medical experts.
The University of Minnesota is offering a May term course that explores pandemics in a historical context with an emphasis on how science intersects with public policy as nations deal with a major health crisis. HMED 3940—History Making: Epidemics, Politics and Coronavirus will also examine COVID-19 and the forces that are shaping governmental and public responses to the pandemic. The class is being offered through the U’s College of Science and Engineering in a multidisciplinary collaboration with History Department Chair Ann Waltner who is contributing to the curriculum. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, a conversation with Macey Flood, a PhD candidate at the U of M who is teaching the course which is open to both degree-seeking students and the general public.
Minnesota has one of the highest rates of volunteering in the nation. Even in the age of COVID-19, many of us are pitching in to help, although social distancing and stay-at-home orders are changing the ways we deliver volunteer services. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, University of Minnesota Professor of Psychology and Director of the U’s Center for the Study of the Individual and Society Dr. Mark Snyder joins us to discuss why we volunteer and the benefits of volunteering.
The COVID-19 pandemic is hitting this country’s African American population especially hard. Many of its victims have existing medical conditions that make them particularly vulnerable to the disease’s most lethal effects. University of Minnesota Professor of African American and African Studies Keith Mayes discusses how the social and health care inequities that existed prior to the coronavirus crisis have contributed to its disproportionate impact on communities of color.
The COVID-19 pandemic is dominating the headlines these days, eclipsing the political campaigns currently underway. How are the candidates adapting to the reality of social distancing that has upended traditional campaign strategies? And how is fear of the virus impacting the presidential primary elections? University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson discusses the state of American politics in the era of COVID-19.
The COVID-19 pandemic has shuttered stadiums and put professional and collegiate sports on indefinite hold. Closed gyms and social distancing guidelines have sidelined amateur athletes as well. Sports and personal fitness are central to the lives of many Minnesotans, and their loss is deeply felt. University of Minnesota Professor of Sociology Douglas Hartmann discusses the cultural significance of sports and physical activities and how the absence of both impacts our sense of community and self.
The COVID-19 crisis has dramatically impacted the way that we perform our jobs. With shelter-in-place orders and social distancing guidelines in effect, many of us who have the option to work from home are doing so. While some companies have previously offered work-from-home opportunities to their employees, the pandemic has dramatically increased the numbers of remote workers. This week, University of Minnesota McKnight Endowed Presidential Chair in Sociology Phyllis Moen discusses the challenges of working remotely in the era of COVID-19 and the ways our workplaces may change going forward.
The coronavirus crisis is taking a serious toll on the economy. Job losses are mounting, and the stock market has declined sharply during the past few weeks. Timothy Kehoe, the Distinguished McKnight Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Minnesota discusses the current economic situation. Kehoe is also an advisor to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. His opinions and perspectives do not necessarily reflect those of the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank or the Federal Reserve System.
Women and people of color are historically underrepresented in the sciences, technology, engineering and math, the so-called STEM professions. A University of Minnesota partnership with a St. Paul middle school is aiming to help address that disparity. Two U of M professors and a group of undergraduates are mentoring students at Murray Middle School which is located near the U’s St. Paul campus. The class is titled Stepping Into the Gap: Understanding the Challenges of Supporting Diversity in STEM. It’s part of the University’s Grand Challenges curriculum which is a multidisciplinary approach to introduce students to complex issues that impact the world community. Associate Professor of Psychology Cheryl Olman and Associate Professor of Educational Psychology/Associate Vice Provost for Equity and Diversity Keisha Varma tell us about the class they are co-teaching.
Fifty-six years ago this month, a Minnesota garage rock band’s novelty record with a pulsating beat was racing up both the local and national charts. The Trashmen’s Surfin’ Bird was released in the fall of 1963 and became an immediate regional hit by capitalizing on the California surfing scene that was popularized by groups like the Beach Boys and Jan and Dean. By December of 1963, the song was in heavy rotation on Top 40 stations throughout the country and came close to scoring the top spot on the Billboard record chart. In this episode, we explore the bands, recording studios, record labels and radio DJs who defined the Minnesota music scene in the early and mid-1960s. Our guest is Rick Schefchik, the author of Everybody’s Heard About the Bird: The True Story of 1960s Rock And Roll in Minnesota, published by the University of Minnesota Press.
Guest: University of Minnesota Regent’s Professor of History & Asian American Studies Erika Lee
Immigration is one of America’s most divisive issues. Congress has thus far failed to come up with a comprehensive immigration reform plan that enjoys bipartisan support. Donald Trump made illegal immigration a key component of his presidential campaign platform. Now, as president, Trump continues to focus on immigration, and his administration’s policy of separating families who cross the border with Mexico has generated considerable controversy. Despite the image of the US as a melting pot, fear and distrust of immigrants has waxed and waned throughout the country’s history. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, we have a conversation with Erika Lee, an Andrew Carnegie Fellow, Regents Professor of History and Asian American Studies, a Distinguished McKnight University Professor and the Rudolph J. Vecoli Chair in Immigration at the University of Minnesota. She is currently on leave as the Director of the U’s Immigration Research Center, and is the author of a new book titled America for Americans: A History of Xenophobia in the United States. A book launch event and roundtable discussion is taking place on December 3 from 6:00 pm-8:30 pm at the University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Guest: Hamline University Professor of Political Science and University of Minnesota Visiting Professor of Law David Schultz
An impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump is underway in the U.S. House of Representatives. The president is alleged to have pressured Ukrainian leaders to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, over the latter’s business dealings in Ukraine. Trump is also alleged to have urged Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate possible Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election, despite the fact that there is no evidence of such interference having taken place. A key issue is whether President Trump threatened to withhold military aid to Ukraine if the requested investigations did not materialize. Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky have both denied that military aid was conditioned on a quid pro quo, although Trump has admitted to discussing the Bidens during a phone call with Zelensky. The impeachment inquiry became public this week, with US diplomats testifying before the House Intelligence Committee. Hamline University Political Science Professor and University of Minnesota Visiting Professor of Law David Schultz discusses the current impeachment inquiry, and previous impeachment proceedings against US presidents.
Guest: University of Minnesota Professor of Sociology/Department Chair Doug Hartmann
Minnesota has some of the nation’s worst achievement and opportunity gaps between whites and people of color. These disparities manifest themselves in lower high school graduation rates, lower homeownership rates and less accumulation of wealth for non-white Minnesotans. University of Minnesota Professor of Sociology and Department Chair Doug Hartmann discusses these racial inequities and the challenges society faces in trying to level the playing field.
Guest: University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law Timothy Johnson
The founders of the United States envisioned the Supreme Court as the weakest of the three branches of government. But even a one-term president can nominate Supreme Court justices who, if confirmed by the Senate, can sit on the bench for life. The presidential impact on public policy can extend well beyond their tenure in office. Despite the founder’s intentions, many scholars now believe that the Supreme Court is the most powerful branch of government. University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law Timothy Johnson—a nationally recognized Supreme Court expert—shares his insights on how the Court functions and why its influence has grown over the decades. You can hear Professor Johnson speak on this topic at the U of M College of Continuing and Professional Studies Headliners event on October 10.
Guest: University of Minnesota Professor of Economics Timothy Kehoe
The United States and China are in the midst of a tariff battle that has roiled markets. There are also signs that the world economy is slowing, and that’s prompted fears of recession. University of Minnesota Professor of Economics Timothy Kehoe joins us to discuss trade tensions, their impact on Minnesota-based companies such as Best Buy and Target, and the overall state of the economy.
Guests: Department of Agronomy & Plant Genetics Assistant Teaching Professor Mary Braake & Associate Professor Peter Morrell
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (DFL) is ordering state agencies to prepare for the potential legalization of marijuana for recreational use. During the last legislative session, the Republican-controlled Senate rejected a bill that would have legalized recreational marijuana in 2022, and Majority Leader Paul Gazelka says he has no interest in revisiting the issue. Marijuana use for medical purposes is currently permitted in the state. The controversy over legalization is sparking greater interest in cannabis. This semester, the University of Minnesota is offering a course on cannabis, focusing on its scientific properties, societal impact and the state and federal regulation of the crop. The course is being offered by the U’s Department of Agronomy and Plant Genetics. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, we chat with the faculty members who are co-teaching the class, titled “The Science of Cannabis.”
Guest: University of Minnesota Professor & History Department Chair Ann Waltner
Authoritarian governments are on the rise throughout the world. But organized resistance to the policies these governments are implementing are underway. This week on Dialogue Minnesota, a look at the protest movement in Hong Kong, and how it may signal a growing pushback to authoritarian leaders and governments. Ann Waltner, a professor and chair of the English Department at the University of Minnesota and an expert on Chinese history, shares her insights.
Guest: University of Minnesota Aquatic Invasive Species Center Extension Educator Megan Weber
One of Minnesota’s most valued resources are our lakes, rivers and streams. But those waters are increasingly threatened by aquatic invasive species…living things that are not native to our state. Aquatic invasive species include fishes, plants, invertebrates and microbes that can harm our health, environment and economy. The University of Minnesota’s Aquatic Invasive Species Research Center has identified roughly three dozen such species. This week, a look at a program offered through the Center that trains citizen scientists to monitor aquatic invasive species. We’ll learn how these volunteers are providing researchers with the necessary data to help prevent the spread of these harmful animals and plants. We chatted with Megan Weber, an extension educator at the Center.
Guest: University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs Senior Fellow Art Rolnick
Fifty years ago, the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and the University of Minnesota created a partnership that continues to have a profound impact on economic theory and policy. Several young economics professors were instrumental in forging this partnership and became known as the Four Horsemen of the Economic Revolution. U of M Humphrey School of Public Affairs Senior Fellow Art Rolnick discusses The Four Horsemen, their enduring impact on economics, and an upcoming event he’s moderating on the U of M campus where all four will discuss contemporary economic issues.
Guest: Veteran journalist and former executive director of the Minnesota News Council Gary Gilson
In mid-July, President Donald Trump unleashed a Twitter tirade directed at the so-called Squad—four Democratic US Congresswomen who are also people of color. His Tweets have been characterized by some as racist in content. Several prominent news outlets have taken the unusual step of labeling the president’s Tweets as racist, and this has triggered a broader discussion about how the media approaches issues of race. Veteran journalist and former executive director of the Minnesota News Council Gary Gilson offers his insights.
Guests: University of Minnesota History Department Chair Ann Waltner & Adjunct Professor Joseph Haker
The student government at the University of Minnesota’s Twin Cities campus recently led a charge to rename four campus buildings whose namesakes were accused of racism, anti-Semitism and promoting eugenics. Former U President Eric Kaler, who stepped down on July 1, created a task force to research the actions of the men after whom the buildings are named. The panel released its findings earlier this year, and recommended that the buildings be renamed. In late April, the University’s Board of Regents voted against renaming the buildings. This fall semester, a class titled Prejudice and Protest at the U of M will take a critical look at the University’s history. History Department Chair Ann Waltner and course instructor Joseph Haker discuss the renaming controversy and the challenges of dealing with past injustices.
Guest: University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson
Twenty Democratic presidential contenders squared off in two debates late last month in Miami. University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson analyzes the candidates’ performances during the forum and what will likely be the key issues in the Democratic presidential primary campaign. Also, a look at Minnesota’s legislative session that adjourned in May and the controversy surrounding 5th District Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.
Guest: University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Professor of Political Science Timothy Johnson
This past week, the U.S. Supreme Court wrapped up its term and delivered several significant decisions. Among them was a ruling that federal courts cannot intervene in gerrymandering disputes and another that prevents the Trump administration from including a question regarding citizenship on the 2020 Census. University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Professor of Political Science Timothy Johnson discusses some of the key Supreme Court decisions this past term, and how the ideological leanings of the justices can influence their opinion
Guest: University Assistant Professor of Political Science Mark Bell
During the Cold War, the Soviet and American nuclear arsenals served largely as a deterrent to an all-out military confrontation. Both countries possessed enough weapons to effectively destroy each other. This concept of mutually assured destruction made nuclear war unthinkable. But as more nations have acquired nuclear capability, the purposes these weapons serve in international politics has changed. Each country uses its nuclear arsenal in its own unique way to establish its place in the world order. This week on Access Minnesota, University of Minnesota Assistant Professor of Political Science Mark Bell discusses his concept of nuclear opportunism.
Guest: Bell Museum Director of Public Engagement & Science Learning Holly Menninger
This summer marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Apollo Moon landing. The Bell Museum on the University of Minnesota’s St. Paul campus is celebrating this historic first through a series of exhibits, events and educational programs. We chatted with the museum’s Director of Public Engagement and Science Learning Holly Menninger about this ongoing commemoration called The Year of Apollo: To The Moon and Beyond.
Guests: Phyllis Moen, Kate Schaefers, Jeff Buchanan, Andy Taylor, Arbresha Ibraimi, Max Peterson
An increasing number of Baby Boomers are approaching traditional retirement age but have no intention of segueing to a life of leisure. A University of Minnesota program offers experienced professionals an opportunity to transition to a so-called “encore career”, often at a community-based non-profit. The University of Minnesota’s Advanced Careers Initiative or UMAC is the brainchild of Phyllis Moen, a McKnight Presidential Chair and professor of sociology. UMAC is a multigenerational learning experience, where a group of late-career professionals called fellows team up with undergraduate students to work on a variety of challenges facing society. We sat down with Moen and her colleague, UMAC Executive Director Kate Schaefers to discuss this new life stage and also chatted with some of the fellows and undergraduate students involved in the program. This is part 2 of a two-part series.
Guests: UMAC Founding Director Phyllis Moen & UMAC Executive Director Kate Shaefers
An increasing number of Baby Boomers are approaching traditional retirement age but have no intention of segueing to a life of leisure. A University of Minnesota program offers experienced professionals an opportunity to transition to a so-called “encore career”, often at a community-based non-profit. The University of Minnesota’s Advanced Careers Initiative or UMAC is the brainchild of Phyllis Moen, a McKnight Presidential Chair and professor of sociology. UMAC is a multigenerational learning experience, where a group of late-career professionals called fellows team up with undergraduate students to work on a variety of challenges facing society. We sat down with Moen and her colleague, UMAC Executive Director Kate Schaefers to discuss this new life stage. This is part 1 of a two-part series.
Guest: University of Minnesota Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Bioethics Dr. Steven Miles
Mass shootings reignite the ongoing debate over gun rights in America. The American Medical Association has declared that gun violence is a public health crisis. University of Minnesota Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Bioethics Dr. Steven Miles discusses a public health approach to reducing the number of deaths and injuries from firearms in the U.S.
Guest: Veteran Journalist and former Executive Director of the Minnesota News Council Gary Gilson
The news media is facing significant challenges: declining advertising revenue, stinging criticism from the White House and an American public with a low level of trust in the press. Veteran journalist and former Executive Director of the Minnesota News Council Gary Gilson discusses these troubled times for the news media.
Guest: Twin Cities National Weather Service Forecast Office Warning Coordination Meteorologist Todd Krause
The arrival of spring ushers in the severe weather season in Minnesota. Tornadoes, lightning and flash flooding pose significant dangers for those who are unprepared and unprotected. April 8th-12th is Severe Weather Awareness Week in Minnesota and Wisconsin. Twin Cities National Weather Service Forecast Office Warning Coordination Meteorologist Todd Krause has tips on how to stay safe when storms threaten.
Guest: Dr. Jesse Keenan, Harvard University Graduate School of Design
Climate change is leading to more extreme weather events, forest fires and rising waters along our coastlines. Recently, a conference was held in Duluth to discuss these and other climate-related issues. Dr. Jesse Keenan is a social scientist on the faculty of the Harvard University School of Design and is an expert on the impacts of climate change on property and infrastructure. His keynote presentation at the conference was titled Destination Duluth: The Fact and Fiction of a Shared Climate Future. Keenan believes that Duluth may be a potential refuge for people leaving other parts of the country due to climate change.
Guest: University of Minnesota Assistant Professor of Human Resource Development Joshua Collins
Senator Amy Klobuchar is facing accusations from some former staffers that she mistreated them. Other former staffers have expressed support for the Senator. What differentiates a tough boss from an abusive boss? And are women held to a different standard than men when it comes to their management style?
University of Minnesota Assistant Professor of Human Resource Development Joshua Collins shares his insights on managers’ expectations of their employees.
Guest: University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Sociology Joshua Page
In the American criminal justice system, a person suspected of committing a crime can be released from custody pending a trial if they post bail, a monetary payment that will be refunded if they make their court appearances. Suspects often turn to a bail bond company if they or their relatives and friends are unable to come up with the money required by the court. New research is pointing out flaws in the bail bond system that can adversely impact low-income communities. University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Sociology Joshua Page discusses his study of the bail bond industry.
Guest: University of Minnesota Family Social Science Professor Marlene Stum
People often avoid the topic of mortality and how their affairs should be managed following their death. Nearly three years ago, the news that music legend Prince died without a will served as a wakeup call for many Minnesotans. University of Minnesota Family Social Science Professor Marlene Stum discusses the estate planning process and the importance of preparing in advance for end-of-life decisions.
Guest: University of Minnesota Assistant Professor of Entomology Vera Krischik
Scientists are expressing concern about the declining numbers of pollinating insects such as bees and butterflies. Urbanization, the loss of prairie land and the use of pesticides have all contributed to the problem. But there are things that land owners and homeowners can do to make their properties more pollinator-friendly. University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Entomology Vera Krischik discusses the role of these beneficial insects.
Guest: Hamline University Political Science Professor/University of Minnesota of Minnesota Visiting Professor of Law David Schultz.
The longest partial federal government shutdown in U.S. history came to an end when President Donald Trump gave Congress three weeks to come up with a plan that would include funding for a border wall. Recently, the President expressed doubt that legislation acceptable to him will pass Congress before the February 15th deadline. Trump is threatening to either declare a national emergency to fund the wall or partially shut down the government again if he doesn’t get his way. Hamline University Political Science Professor and University of Minnesota Visiting Professor of Law David Schultz discusses the reasons why government shutdowns occur, the difference between funding for border security versus a physical barrier, and the prospects that Minnesota could experience a state government shut down.
Guests: Dr. Elise Sarvas, DDS, dental director of the Minnesota Oral Health Project & Dr. Amos Deinard, MD, University of Minnesota pediatrician.
Many young Minnesota children from low-income families lack access to dental care. When oral health issues arise, caregivers often seek temporary and expensive treatment in hospital emergency rooms. But there’s a simple, low-cost procedure that protects kids from developing cavities. Dr. Elise Sarvas, dental director for the Minnesota Oral Health Project and Dr. Amos Deinard, University of Minnesota pediatrician discuss the benefits of applying fluoride varnish to children’s teeth to prevent caries, more commonly known as cavities.
Guest: University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law Timothy Johnson.
The US Supreme Court is the final arbiter of legal issues that can alter the course of history. Yet, much of its decision-making process takes place in private. A citizen scientist research project aims to shed light on these closed-door deliberations. University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law Timothy Johnson describes his efforts to transcribe the justices’ handwritten notes for broad public access.
Guest: University of Minnesota Assistant Professor of Sociology and Robina Institute of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice faculty member Michelle Phelps.
The probation system as we know it dates back to the Progressive Era. Created to provide offenders with a supervised path to reintegrate into society, contemporary critics say that probation is often arbitrarily enforced and is frequently a pipeline back to prison. University of Minnesota Assistant Professor of Sociology Michelle Phelps discusses her research on the probation system and how it disproportionally impacts African-Americans.
Guest: University of Minnesota Regents Professor Emeritus of History Sara Evans
As we close out 2018, we continue our look back at the extraordinary year of 1968. This week, part 2 of our conversation with University of Minnesota Regents Professor Emeritus of History Sara Evans about some of the events that shaped that tumultuous year.
Guest: University of Minnesota Regents Professor Emeritus of History Sara Evans
As we close out 2018, we continue our look back at the extraordinary year of 1968. This week, a conversation with University of Minnesota Regents Professor Emeritus of History Sara Evans about some of the events that shaped that tumultuous year. It's the first in a two-part series.
Guest: University of Minnesota Professor of African American and African Studies Keith Mayes
As 2018 winds down, we look back at the extraordinary year of 1968. University of Minnesota Professor of African American and African Studies Keith Mayes discusses the significant events of that year in the the civil rights movement.
Guest: University of Minnesota Economics Professor Timothy Kehoe
President Donald Trump is taking credit for the current state of the economy, citing low unemployment and robust economic growth. But the president’s trade wars are generating controversy. University of Minnesota Economics Professor Timothy Kehoe returns to discuss trade and tariffs, their potential impact on Minnesota's farmers and big box retailers and the overall state of the nation's economy.
Guest: University of Minnesota Professor of Economics Timothy Kehoe
President Donald Trump is taking credit for the current state of the economy, citing low unemployment and robust economic growth. But the president’s trade wars and a growing budget deficit under his administration are stirring controversy. This week, a conversation with University of Minnesota Economics Professor Timothy Kehoe about trade and tariffs. It’s the first of a two-part series on the state of the US economy.
Guest: University of Minnesota Regents Professor of American Studies and History Elaine Tyler May
Audio Block
Double-click here to upload or link to a .mp3.
Learn more It’s been nearly 70 years since Russia acquired a nuclear bomb and thrust America into a state of anxiety. Schools conducted duck and cover drills, and some homeowners built fallout shelters. The collapse of the Soviet Union brought an end to the Cold War, but our unease persisted. University of Minnesota Regents Professor of American Studies and History Elaine Tyler May discusses her latest book Fortress America: How We Embraced Fear and Abandoned Democracy.
University of Minnesota Associate Professor of Political Science Kathryn Pearson provides analysis of the midterm elections and what we can expect in their wake.
President Donald Trump is threatening to pull the US out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces--or INF--Treaty with Russia. Trump is also promising to bolster the nation’s nuclear arsenal until, in his words, other nuclear powers “come to their senses.”
Brett Kavanaugh was sworn in as a Supreme Court Justice following a contentious and partisan confirmation process. University of Minnesota Morse Alumni Distinguished Professor of Political Science and Law Timothy Johnson discusses the impact on our political and judicial institutions.
50 years ago, U.S. Olympic sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fists in a gesture of support for the Black Power Movement during the medals presentation at the Summer Games in Mexico City.
At the fictional Payne University, egos clash and dysfunction reigns. University of Minnesota Professor of English and Creative Writing Julie Schumacher reprises Jason Fitger and his Payne University colleagues in her new book The Shakespeare Requirement. It’s a sequel to her Thurber Award winning article Dear Committee Members. We chatted with her in her office about her latest novel and the process of fiction writing.