Rep. Seifert brings seven-point plan to Capitol
Republican gubernatorial hopeful Rep. Marty Seifert, of Marshall, detailed a seven-point plan for leadership today at the Capitol — he drew from his past legislation in crafting the plan.
One of the points was ethics reform.
Seifert, who said he has never taken campaign contributions from lobbyists as a lawmaker and will not take them as a gubernatorial candidate, spoke of requiring a waiting period before former lawmakers could turn lobbyists.
Additionally, Seifert spoke of tighter controls on committee chairs who are running for higher office — he threw out the names of several DFL committee chairs running for governor — and their ability to okay legislative allowances for themselves.
“I just want to throw it out there,” said Seifert, saying some lawmakers question the need for any legislative meetings during the interim and suggesting the hearings and meetings may simply be a means for candidates to have the state pick up the check for cost of campaign travels.
Seifert said he had no evidence of this taking place.
Seifert, who stepped down as House minority leader prior to officially becoming a gubernatorial candidate, also questioned the ethics of allowing House speakers and minority leaders running for higher office — DFL gubernatorial candidate House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher falling into this category — the power to appoint people to various commissions and boards.
Couldn’t an appointment be a way of pleasing or gaining favor with a party delegate? Seifert asked.
In a sense the ethics reforms that he was proposing shouldn’t have to be enshrined in law, Seifert explained.
They should just be followed as matter of course.
But Seifert suggested a need for action existed and that people could agree on what needed to be done.
I clicked candidate Seifert’s website which had a brief press release announcing the “Marty Seifert’s Leadership Plan for Minnesota” but no details.
I was most interested in number 4.
“4). End pork-barrel spending and earmarks, which bloat the state budget and bonding bill.”
Did Representative Seifert detail which spending items have been approved that he would oppose ? I thought that Governor Tim Pawlenty used the line item veto to cut $208 million from the $925 million bonding bill passed by the state Legislature. Is Representative Seifert indicating that the Governor missed some items ?
Also, without the details, did Representative Seifert elaborate on his objective (as stated on his website) to reduce the number of cabinet departments ? Has he indicated what would be affected ?
I am skeptical if this is anything more than political rhetoric and this election is too important for voters to fall for campaign promises that will never be achieved.
Regarding Representative Seifert’s concern of his competitors using “legislative meetings” for campaign purposes, wouldn’t the easiest thing to do would be that neither the MN-GOP nor DFL have any campaign activities until after the 2010 session ends. It may sound silly, but in reality, both parties will have their endorsement processes complete before May … and a five month campaign period is way too long. Let the candidates start campaigning after the session is over, let the state parties endorse before July 1st and have the primary in August … there is still a solid two months available for campaigning and debates.
Using that logic, if Representative Seifert believes that earmarks are the problem, then why doesn’t he challenge his Republican colleagues to refuse to offer any earmarks ?