John Harrington won in a 9 way primary race to become the DFL endorsed candidate for Senate District 67, the east side of St Paul. Tonight was the official endorsement of the DFL, since the primary win does not automatically grant the DFL endorsement. Previous very popular State State Senator Mea Moua was there to cheer on John Harrington, as well as Mayor Chris Coleman and other public officials.
John Harrington spoke before the endorsement of
encouraging business, especially small business to thrive on the east side so there would be more jobs
working with all of the diverse communities
the St Paul police effort to reduce crime
working with the Democratic leadership and consulting with Mea Moua
his shared values with the Democratic party
recognition of all the hard work that went into this primary
Every delegate who could vote for endorsement came and no alternates were upgraded. There were about 25 additional people there. The vote was 23-4 for endorsement.
Just when you thought the U.S. Senate couldn't do any less for clean energy and the environment than it's (not) done so far, we now face the real possibility of what would amount to a "stop-work order" on the 40-year-old, wildly successful (e.g., studies finding benefits outweighing costs at a 40:1 ratio), Clean Air Act.
That's right: believe it or not, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) is moving ahead with a sequel to Sen. Lisa Murkowski's nefarious attempt, earlier this summer, to gut the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s power to protect the public health from dangerous pollutants, including harmful greenhouse gases. Just as bad, Rockefeller's proposal would keep America addicted to oil and other old, polluting energy technologies, while delaying or derailing our switch to a clean, prosperous energy economy.
Essentially, what Rockefeller is proposing would tell the EPA - at least for two years, although we know that justice delayed is often justice denied! - that it has to be asleep at the switch, that it must not hold polluters accountable, that it must look the other way whole Big Oil and Big Coal trash the environment. Is that the lesson the Senate learned from the Gulf of Mexico disaster? Really?
Fortunately, not everyone is so clueless as the U.S. Senate appears to be right now. For instance, in yesterday's Politico, two energy investors - one Democrat, one Republican - explained what's at stake in clear, compelling language.
We are not experts in vote counting or horse trading. But we do know how investors and markets will respond if Congress ultimately fails to put a market-based price on carbon. The response from capital will be brutal: Money will flow to places like China, Europe and India - and U.S. jobs will go with it.
The path to creating more U.S. jobs is simple: Pass legislation that eliminates uncertainty and levels the playing field, and investors will fund projects that create good jobs here at home. Rules bring certainty, certainty spurs investment, and investment creates jobs.
[...]
Take it from investors: Removing the uncertainty, and taking a more thoughtful approach to energy policy by putting a market price on carbon, can bring home new investments and jobs - and ensure that America leads the clean energy economy.
Instead, it now looks like the Senate not only won't be moving us forwards, but instead will be trying to move us significantly - and disastrously - backwards. What's truly stunning about this possibility is that, right now, the science of climate change is clearer and more disturbing than ever. Heat waves are getting worse, the ice caps are shrinking faster than ever, and scientists are telling us that the world is setting new temperature records almost every month, every year, and every decade. In addition, the results of our insatiable thirst for fossil fuels were demonstrated starkly and tragically, both in a West Virginia coal mine as well as in the Gulf of Mexico, on TV screens all across America in recent months. As if all this isn't bad enough, we also could run out of water.
The American people know this situation can't go on. In fact, recent polls show large majorities supporting an energy bill that would "[l]imit pollution, invest in domestic energy sources and encourage companies to use and develop clean energy...by charging energy companies for carbon pollution in electricity or fuels like gas." In other words, this is a case where good policy - limiting greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing our national security, safeguarding public health, jumpstarting a clean energy revolution - and good politics - strong poll results for doing just that - appear to align. Yet, the U.S. Senate appears ready to ignore both good policy and good politics, and actually move to make matters worse by gutting the EPA and letting polluters like BP off the hook.
Don't let them do it. Call your Senators right now and tell them "hell no" to the "Let Polluters Pollute with Impunity Act." Also, while you're at it, call the White House and tell President Obama that, if such a measure reaches his desk, he will veto it - no ifs, ands, or buts.
Take action today for a cleaner, stronger, and more sustainable future. Join NRDC Action Fund on Facebook and Twitter and stay up-to-date on the latest environmental issues and actions you can take to help protect our planet.
The climate bill blame game has begun. When I first started writing this post about the so-called death of the climate bill, I literally pointed the finger at just about everyone, including myself. The anger poured out, and I was frank in my assessment as well as unforgiving in the motives behind this latest setback.
After I was done with my self-loathing tantrum, the kids ran in the door from camp and I was swept up in the lovely reality of my family's banter. It is summer, so the pace in our home is a bit more relaxed in the evening. We aren't quite as quick to rush through dinner, toss the kids in a bath, and then march them off to bed. Ice cream and extra cuddles are relished, and I am reminded each year at this time why I do this job.
Later, after progeny were tucked in, I went back to my draft blog post to spruce it up. I reread my rage, disappointment, and irrational ramblings and was embarrassed. And I asked myself "What good is all this blame going to do?"
At the end of the day, it is my kids - and your kids - who lose when we implode. If you think kids have a lot to say about their parents now on Dr. Phil, can you imagine what our children will say in 50 years should we fail to get our act together?
The country should be ready for this. The facts are on our side. As we witness the worst industry-caused environmental catastrophe in our history, the worst coal mining disaster in 40 years, and sweat through the hottest first 6 months of any year on record, it is clear that there's never been a more urgent time to move forward with a smart clean energy and climate plan.
Unfortunately, the politicians just aren't there. At every juncture during this debate, a minority, led by the Republican leadership and supported by a few impressionable (I might say pathetic) Democrats, has obstructed the opportunity to solve America's energy problems, preferring to leave the worst polluters and the big petro-dictators in control of our energy policy, while tax-payers are forced to pay for their messes.
Oopsy... there goes that blame again. Let's focus on what we can do next.
Hope is not lost. Of course, the closer we get to the midterm elections, the more challenging passing a bill becomes. Still, it's not impossible. In fact, the Senate has passed almost every single bedrock environmental law in the fall of an election year or in the "lame duck" session following an election. Here are just a few examples:
o Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) - 1996 Amendments: 8/6/96
o Food Quality Protection Act: 8/3/96
o Energy Policy Act of 1992: 10/24/92
o Clean Air Act of 1990: 11/15/90
o SDWA - 1986 Amendments: 6/19/86
o CERCLA (Superfund): House 9/23/80, Senate 11/24/80, POTUS 12/11/80
o Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA): 10/21/76
o Toxic Substances & Control Act (TSCA): 10/11/76
o SDWA: 12/16/74
o Clean Water Act: 10/18/72
o Establishment of the EPA: first proposed 7/9/70, established 12/2/70
o National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): 1/1/70
o The Wilderness Act: 9/3/64
As this list demonstrates, the Senate and the environmental movement are no strangers to passing major legislation right before - or just after - an election.
I don't want to overpromise success. This is an uphill battle. But if you and I show up to every town hall, rally, spaghetti dinner, and other rituals of election year and fight for our kids... fight for our country... fight for our America... we can turn the tide. Without that kind of passion, we will all lose. That's an outcome we must try hard to avoid, on behalf of people, communities, large and small businesses - oh, and our kids, sleeping peacefully or playing happily around the country.
In the meantime, we must also protect what we already have, like a plethora of state laws and the federal Clean Air Act. I recommend reading David Doniger's blog on Switchboard today that really outlines how we can make progress with the tools we have right now.
In coming weeks and months, we must continue to push forward for a strong, clean energy and climate bill, just like we have done countless times in the past. I am done with blame. History is on our side. Are you?
Take action today for a cleaner, stronger, and more sustainable future. Join NRDC Action Fund on Facebook and Twitter and stay up-to-date on the latest environmental issues and actions you can take to help protect our planet.
Yesterday, President Obama met with Senators at the White House and pushed them to pass comprehensive, clean energy and climate legislation. Still, the skeptics are spinning a monotonous web of negativity regarding what is achievable on this front. And, not surprisingly, the "mainstream media" once again has been asleep at the wheel in setting the record straight. Fortunately, we know that when this President rolls up his sleeves, he gets stuff done and delivers on his promises. One thing’s for sure; President Obama is anything but an underachiever!
Along these lines, President Obama held a press conference following the G-20 summit in Toronto. In response to a reporter’s question regarding how he would achieve his deficit reduction goals, the president responded:
For some reason people keep being surprised when I do what I said I was going to do. So, I say I’m going to reform our [health care system], and people say well gosh that’s not smart politics maybe we should hold off. Or I say we’re going to move forward on [Don’t Ask Don’t Tell] and somehow people say well why are you doing that, I’m not sure that’s good politics. I’m doing it because I said I was going to do it, and I think it’s the right thing to do. And people should learn that lesson about me, because next year when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficit and debt step up cause I’m calling their bluff.
To that list of accomplishments, we could also add:
**Creating or saving 2.2-2.8 million jobs, well on the way to Obama’s February 2009 pledge that he would "create or save 3-and-a-half million jobs over the next two years."
**Reforming Wall Street (likely to pass Congress any day now)
**Overhauling the student loan market
**Reaching a nuclear arms treaty with Russia
We could go on and on, but you get the point: anyone who continues, at this point, to be "surprised" when President Obama gets things done when he puts his mind to it is deep in denial. Or, as a previous president might have put it, they are wildly "misunderestimating" our 44th president.
Clearly, as we’ve seen over the past two years, underachieving is not a problem Barack Obama suffers from. Of course, even a superachiever like Barack Obama has an awful lot on his plate to deal with. And right now, one of the most important things on Obama’s plate is figuring out how to push comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation through the U.S. Senate. Along those lines, yesterday, Obama met with a group of Senators on this issue, reportedly holding firm in his call for putting a price on carbon emissions.
The question at this point is, will President Obama roll up his sleeves and deliver on another of his major campaign promise (as well as a major challenge facing our nation)? Given the long list of accomplishments mentioned above, it certainly wouldn’t be smart to bet against him. The fact is, Barack Obama usually succeeds in whatever he puts his mind to.
Given the nation’s increased focus on energy and climate issues – and the increased support by the American people for taking strong action as a result of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster – now is clearly the time for boldness and for bluff calling by our nation’s leaders. Today, President Obama has the opportunity to demonstrate once more that, when he rolls up his sleeves, he accomplishes what he says he’s going to do. In sum, today is clearly the moment for President Obama to prove the doubters and naysayers wrong – to call their bluff - yet again!
As is often the case, the "mainstream" media nowadays is pushing a "conventional wisdom" line that has only one major problem - it's largely or completely wrong. In this case, the "wisdom" is that voting for limits on carbon pollution is bad politics. The polling indicates it's far more complicated than that.
For instance, the latest CBS/NY Times poll indicates that nearly 90% of Americans believe U.S. energy policy needs either "fundamental changes' or "to be completely rebuilt," while 97% of Americans are "angry" or "bothered" by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Those percentages hardly appear to indicate a status quo, "conventional wisdom" electorate on this issue, or an automatic political downside to making fundamental changes in U.S. energy policy.
Perhaps that is why, when you actually look at the 17 Democrats up for reelection this year (Bayh, Bennet, Boxer, Burris, Dodd, Dorgan, Feingold, Gillibrand, Inouye, Leahy, Lincoln, Mikulski, Murray, Reid, Schumer, Specter, Wyden) and subtract out those retiring (Bayh, Burris, Dodd, Dorgan) or defeated in a primary (Specter), you find that the vast majority - all except for Blanche Lincoln - are in favor of climate and energy legislation. Let's take a look.
Michael Bennet- What could be clearer than this recent quote, "The best way to limit carbon pollution is for Congress to pass a comprehensive climate and energy bill."
Barbara Boxer- A climate champion by any measure
Russ Feingold- Issued a statement declaring, "Climate change is real and we need to address it. By blocking action on climate change, the Murkowski resolution would have stalled our march toward energy independence through more efficient vehicles, alternative fuels and renewable energy, all of which can spur new American jobs."
Kirsten Gillibrand - Listed as a definite "yes" on a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill by E&E News Daniel Inouye- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Patrick Leahy- He recently stated, "Let us not be known as the Congress that continued to punt, pass and kick on some of the crucial issues like these, on which the American people are looking for solutions, not procrastination."
Barbara Mikulski - Listed as a definite yes on a comprehensive, clean energy and climate bill by E&ENews Patty Murray- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Harry Reid - Has called for "bring[ing] comprehensive clean energy legislation before the full Senate later this summer."
Chuck Schumer- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Ron Wyden- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews
And let's not forget these two letters - one on March 19 to Harry Reid and the other on January 26 to President Obama - showing 33 Senators (not even counting John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, who didn't sign either letter but obviously are champions on this issue, plus most likely others as) clearly calling for climate legislation.
So, why is it that we keep seeing the perception in the "mainstream media" that a vote for comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation is bad politics? Perhaps because of the unfortunate tendency of the "mainstream media" to keep recycling quotes from a few loud Senators -- like Byron Dorgan and Evan Bayh -- who just happen to be exiting the scene altogether for potentially "greener" (and not in the environmental sense!) pastures. For the "mainstream media," recycling their preferred narrative may make a good story (or the story they want to tell, for whatever reason). In politics, however, perception is nine tenths of reality, and in this case the reality is that there is far too much at stake for this country to rely on "conventional" wisdom, especially when the facts - those troublesome things - tell a very different story.
In this context, this past Friday, Greg Sargent of The Plum Line asked an important question regarding clean energy and climate legislation in the U.S. Senate: "Can A bold new crop of Senators save carbon limits?" Sargent's intriguing thesis was that[,] "[i]f carbon limits have any prayer of surviving in the Senate's energy reform bill, it may turn on the efforts of one group: The energetic freshman and sophomore Senators that are pushing hard to keep carbon limits alive." Sargent pointed to an interview with one of those freshmen, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, in which he argued that "There's a lot of new energy in those two classes, and they recognize that this is the moment."
In short, what Merkley's saying is that it's time for Democrats to stop listening so much to the "old guard" of Senators who are retiring. Instead, Merkley makes the case for paying more attention to the Senate freshman (and sophomores), who by definition were elected relatively recently and, therefore - at least theoretically - might have their fingers closer to the pulse of the public than the old timers. In part, the question is whether there could be a "generational" difference going on here. Not "generational" in the chronological sense, in which "younger" Senators are more pro-environment than "older" Senators. But, perhaps, "generational" in the sense of "political age," as in "how long have they been in Washington, DC?"
Given the analysis above, we might want to add "members in cycle" to Merkley's admonition about listening more to freshmen then to old timers. Because the fact is, the majority of Democrats actually facing the polls this November are in favor of taking action on energy independence, clean energy, and holding corporate polluters accountable. Perhaps this is because they are listening to what the public is clearly demanding, which is fundamental change in U.S. energy policy? And perhaps they are not listening to a "conventional media" narrative which is completely wrong? Regardless of the reason, it appears at the moment - and certainly on this issue - that Democrats would be better served by listening more to the folks facing public opinion, as well as those elected more recently, and less to the ones preparing to depart for "greener" pastures.
"I just got back from the Celebrate Minnesota event at the National Arboretum," Franni Franken began. Franni is Sen. Al Franken's wife. "There were so many Minnesotans there it seemed like we'd emptied the state."
Volunteers from General Mills, Target and "a whole bunch of organizations" helped stage the events. They served Minnesota food like wild rice, cheese curds, walleye and swedish meatballs made from buffalo. She said she really liked the meatballs.
"I found a spot near the door where they were bringing the appetizers in," she continued. "So I could eat some cheese curds. It made me think about the State Fair ... not too long now until it starts, I've got to get warmed up for it!"
I asked about what's the latest from Al.
"He's so very, very, very proud to have voted for health care reform," she replied. "Because checks went out Tuesday for $250 to 63,000 seniors in Minnesota." These checks will cover the "donut hole" in Medicare prescription drug coverage.
"And it's going to get even better for Minnesota seniors," she continued. "Next year drug prices are going to get even better, there's going to be a 50% discount because of health care reform."
In family news, Franni's sister Cathy is retiring after 43 years as a public school teacher. She taught first graders in Maine.
"We're throwing a retirement luncheon for her," she said. "Both my kids will be there. You know Cathy comes from a long line of teachers." Franni's Mom taught school after earning her college degree and daughter Thomasin is an educator/nutrionist in DC.
"Al has been a part of the family for a long time now," she continued. "He helped throw the retirement party for my Mom, too. Hopefully, we'll be around to throw a party for Thomasin."
We also talked about the second woman to come forward with allegations of rape against employees of Halliburton/KBR while in Iraq.
John Harrington, the previous St Paul police chief has filed to run as a Democrat for the east-side St Paul State Senate seat of the popular State Senator Mee Moua. Senator Mee Moua is not running again. In the backdrop of Polly's coffee shop, I interviewed John Harrington. While we spoke of many things, part of my job is bring out the essence of what I see in a potential candidate. I see in John these charateristics:
Caring for the community
Problem solving skills that target the roots of problems in practical ways
Eloquence in the ability to persuade
So if you can only watch one clip of this interview, check out this one on problem solving.
When the popular esteemed State senator Mee Moua (east St Paul), announced at end of session, that she won't seek re-election, there were shock waves since there is no DFL endorsement that could be done in the time frame with a reasonable appropriate number of people. So it will be a primary race!
St. Paul Police Chief John Harrington is being encouraged to run for the seat. Here are his advantages:
Strong name recognition
Recognized work on community issues like domestic violence
Speaks eloquently in speeches
Great in working a room and personal persuasion
Available immediately for full time campaigning
And Chief Harrington says that he will consider running.
That's the amount Minnesota Senate Democrats are proposing to cut the state's $2.7 billion budget gap by tax increases. The rest would be in spending cuts and shifting payments. Yet, Governor Tim "Read My Lips" Pawlenty repeated his threat to veto any bill that included any tax increase, going as far as telling commissioners to prepare for a government shutdown.
What the matter, T-Paw? You worried you won't be invited to any more Teabagger parties if you budge a little on this? I think the Senate meeting you a little better than half way here.
Let's face it, $2.3 billion in cuts are still going to be painful and will surely effect some of the state's most vulnerable. So I'm sure your reputation will still be safe.
My advice, Tim, is to this offer and run with it. Hell, at will give your anti-tax buddies something to run on, this election.
Pretty much every right winger crawled out from whatever rock they normally hide under appeared at yesterday's Palin-Bachmann lovefest. Considering how much lying and trash-talking was going on, some pretty preposterous things were said. For example, Sen. Dave Senjem (R-Rochester) apparently hit the kool-aid a little too hard:
When you think of the legislative GOP's most prodigious trash-talkers, the name of Senate Minority Leader Dave Senjem, R-Rochester, is hardly the first to spring to mind. So it seemed noteworthy when Senjem took to the podium at yesterday's Michele Bachmann/Sarah Palin rally and made this vow about the fall elections: "For the first time in 38 years, we're gonna control the Senate!"
Maybe Senjem was just channeling his inner Ron "Baghdad Bob" Carey. Carey was eternally upbeat every time he was about to get thrashed.
40 days from today - on May 18 - we will see two HUGE primaries for U.S. Senate. Even though these races aren't in Minnesota, they impact Democrats across the country and, well, the entire country as a whole.
In Pennsylvania, Democratic Congressman Joe Sestak will try to upset Republican-for-decades Arlen Specter.
In Arkansas, Democratic Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter will try to upset corporate lackey Blanche Lincoln.
These two races are tremendously important to defining who and what the Democratic Party is and what we will be fighting for.
If you can volunteer for these candidates (or encourage friends and family in Pennsylvania and Arkansas to do so), that would be amazing.
Of course, if you can help with a contribution to either or both via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page as soon as possible, it will make a big impact.
Polling shows that both Specter and Lincoln are at risk of - if not likely to - hand these Senate seats over to far-right-wing Republicans. (And, even if these two retain the seats, that's not much better on many key issues.)
Congressman Sestak and Lieutenant Governor Halter winning these primaries are critical to keeping these seats in truly Democratic hands. Your support can help make that happen! Please hop over to the Expand the Map! ActBlue page right away to make a contribution - an investment in the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party to pull out an old expression - and show your support.
Thanks SO much for any support you can provide. 40 Days.
Today in Rushford, MN (a city hit hard by the floods of August 2007) Senate District 31 DFLers met to elect party officers, endorse a Senate candidate, and endorse House candidates.
Senate District 31 convention endorsed, by acclamation, our sitting State Senator Sharon Erickson Ropes. She will face Republican Jeremy Miller (who was endorsed March 20 by SD31 Republicans) from Winona in this fall's election.
Then, 31A and 31B separated into their House Districts.
On the 31A side, incumbent DFLer Gene Pelowski was facing an endorsement challenge from Winona City Council member Deb White. After the first ballot Deb White chose to concede before the tally was announced. Gene Pelowski received the endorsement of District 31A, and will face off against his 2008 challenger, Rhett Zenke.
On the 31B side (as a citizen, this is where I spent my time), Spring Grove City Council member Steve Kemp was endorsed unanimously by 31B DFLers to run against incumbent Republican Representative Greg Davids.
Ezra Klein has the scoop (apparently), and the AP is picking up on it.
It's a numbers crunch on votes, and on the money to be spent, and the deficit reduced, and it looks like supporters of the bill have another piece of good news to keep the momentum going into the vote (whenever it occurs). The CBO's numbers look good.
Some momentum from Minnesota was added yesterday when Representative Jim Oberstar announced that he is a solid "yes" on voting for the bill. This announcement prompted "Catholics United" to start airing TV ads thanking Rep. Oberstar for his support of the the bill. The ads are part of a "broader national campaign to underscore Catholic support for health care reform," according to a statement released by the Catholic group.
According to a Democratic source, CBO has finished its work and will release the official preliminary score later today. But here are the basic numbers: The bill will cost $940 billion over the first 10 years and reduce the deficit by $130 billion during that period. In the second 10 years -- so, 2020 to 2029 -- it will reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion. The legislation will cover 32 million Americans, or 95 percent of the legal population.
To put this in context, that's more deficit reduction than either the House or Senate bill, and more coverage than the Senate bill.
How they got these numbers, and whether there are important qualifiers, will be easier to say once CBO releases its analysis. But the bottom line is that this is the exact sort of score that Democrats wanted, and is in fact considerably better than some had come to expect they would receive. Coverage is better than the Senate bill, which will reassure liberals, and deficit reduction is better than either bill, which will reassure conservatives.
With the unveiling of the health reform reconciliation compromise set for noon ET, Democrats are beginning to leak results of the long-awaited Congressional Budget Office score of the provisions. They're pretty good.
The deficit over the first ten years drops by $130 billion compared to the baseline. Importantly, especially for wavering Democrats like Brian Baird, it reduces the debt by $1.2 trillion in the second ten years. Apparently, the CBO says that the bill would reduce Medicare expenditures by about 1.4% per year, extending the solvency of the program by nine years. Thirty-two million Americans will be covered -- about 95% of all those eligible. The cost over decade one: $940 billion. The release today will help Speaker Nancy Pelosi fulfill her promise of providing 72 hours to review the bill before the vote, which is on tap for Sunday.
Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) has spoken out about Republican abuse of the filibuster to obstruct absolutely anything the Democrats want. This time he's criticizing Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) for repeatedly blocking the basic work of the Senate for purely partisan reasons.
The Kentucky Republican battled Democrats on the Senate floor Tuesday to block two nominations to relatively backbench positions -- because he is opposed to a tobacco-related law passed by the Canadian Parliament (that's right, the Canadian Parliament). The use of such delaying tactics is not unprecedented in Senate history, but holding up such minor business stretches the purpose of the Senate's open debate rules to the breaking point.
"This is a perversion of the filibuster and a perversion of the role of the Senate. It used to be that the filibuster was reserved for matters of great principle," said Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) from the well of the Senate. "Some of my colleagues seem more interested in using every procedural method possible to keep the Senate from doing anything than they are in creating jobs or helping Americans struggling in a difficult economy."
(Huffington Post)
John Harrington won in a 9 way primary race to become the DFL endorsed candidate for Senate District 67, the east side of St Paul. Tonight was the official endorsement of the DFL, since the primary win does not automatically grant the DFL endorsement. Previous very popular State State Senator Mea Moua was there to cheer on John Harrington, as well as Mayor Chris Coleman and other public officials.
