The coming end of Tim Walz's political career in Minnesota

 Come this November, whether Kamala Harris wins or loses the presidency, Governor Tim Walz’s political career in Minnesota ends. 

Tim Walz has had an amazing run in Minnesota politics. It includes six terms as a member of Congress, having flipped a Republican conservative district Democratic, even if only temporarily, and by winning the governorship twice and becoming a star among progressives. Nationwide. He was selected as Kamala Harris's vice president both because of his supposed appeal to progressives and his folksy Midwest image that would endear him to swing voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

Were Harris to win the presidency, Walz would resign as governor, move off to Washington, and probably never return to Minnesota politics again. This would be like what happened to Walter Mondale after his national career ended. There is a slight chance that Walz might return to Minnesota much like Hubert Humphrey did after serving as vice-president and losing the presidency, but odds are against it.

On the other hand, were Harris to lose Walz will take the blame for her loss. It will be because of his missteps in many of his claims about his resume or because he turned out to be the wrong and risky choice for Vice President. Many said that perhaps Harris should have selected Pennsylvania. Governor Josh Shapiro to be her running mate, a popular political figure in the most critical swing state.

Were Harris to lose, Walz returns to Minnesota as governor. It will be in the remaining two years of his second term. It is hard to imagine that Walz would be successful in seeking a third term if he decided to do so. While Democrats like him, Walz has built up a lot of opposition across the state of Minnesota, receiving in his second election run for governor a smaller percentage of the vote than the first time, against an arguably weak opponent. Winning a third term in modern Minnesota history has only been accomplished once by Rudy Perpich, and that occurred under extraordinary circumstances of which it is unlikely we will see again.

Walz effectively becomes a lame duck after the 2024 elections in Minnesota, one way or another. Moreover, were the Republicans able to flip one or both houses of the legislature that would also significantly diminish or end his influence in this state. But even if the Democrats hold their political trifecta, they faced the consequences of a possible budget deficit according to the most recent fiscal forecast.  This was caused in part by the significant budgetary increases they enacted in the last two years. Walz will not have the budget surplus he did in the past to do the things he wants. He will have to make far more difficult choices politically than he had to do in his previous six years.

But even assume that Walz does stay on as governor and the Democrats hold the trifecta, having tasted the national spotlight, it is unlikely that he will want to continue his focus at the state level. As the adage goes, after you visited the city, it's kind of hard to keep you down on the farm.

 Under any of these scenarios, Tim Walz will become less of a feature in Minnesota politics in less than a month.

Can Trump Really Flip Minnesota?

            If ever there were a state known as deeply blue in presidential elections, it would be Minnesota. Yet Donald Trump has declared his intention to flip the state in 2024 and he plans to speak at a Minnesota Republican Party event on May 17. Is Minnesota a swing state? Surprisingly, perhaps yes.

Minnesota is the most reliable state in presidential politics for the Democrats. The last time a Republican won the state was Richard Nixon in 1972. Even in 1984, when Ronald Reagan won a blowout election, Minnesota stayed true blue voting for its favorite son, Walter Mondale.

If one looks at Minnesota right now, one sees a state with a trifecta if not a quadfecta. Democrats control both houses of the legislature as well as the governorship and all the Supreme Court justices are also appointed by Democrats. No Republican has won statewide office in Minnesota since 2006 when Tim Pawlenty last won the governorship. All this would suggest that Minnesota is not a swing state.

But consider an alternative view. Back in 2016, Hillary Clinton lost to Bernie Sanders in Minnesota’s Democratic caucus but chose not to come back and campaign. Donald Trump campaigned heavily in Minnesota only to lose the state by 50,000 votes, or one and a half percent. That suggested that perhaps Minnesota is winnable for a Republican candidate.. But to counter that, in 2020, Joe Biden won the state by seven percentage points.

If we look at the characteristics that make for a swing state, Minnesota demonstrates many of them. For example, it has a high percentage of white working class in terms of voters compared to Wisconsin, which has 56% white working class voters, Michigan at 53%, Minnesota hovers around 50%.

The racial composition of Michigan is 77.5% White Caucasian, Wisconsin 84.3%, and Minnesota right in the middle with 81.6%. In terms of college degrees, Michigan has 32% of its population with a college degree, Wisconsin 33%, and  Minnesota 39%. Minnesota demonstrates many of the characteristics that we see in Wisconsin and in Michigan, two more famous swing states.

 Minnesota also bears many other characteristics of other swing states.

Over the last twenty years control of the state legislature has flipped back and forth between the Democrats and Republicans. The current Democratic Party control of the legislature was a result of exceedingly close elections back in 2022. Democrats hold a 34-33 majority in the Senate and had less than 2000 votes  shifted Republicans would have controlled the Senate.  In the House, just a shift of about 2,500 votes might very well mean Republican control.

There are 87 counties in the state. Democrats are winning on average between eight and 12 of those counties in statewide elections, giving Republicans significant regional support. This is another characteristic of what we see in other swing states.

There is certainly no guarantee that Minnesota is actually in play in 2024. But Donald Trump's decision to compete here and to come to Minnesota for the annual Republican Lincoln dinner are indications that he wants the Democrats to defend the state.  For every dollar and every minute that Joe Biden has to spend in this state he can't spend them in another swing state.

            If Biden's goal is to expand the election, to force Trump to defend North Carolina, and  Florida, Trump is forcing Biden to defend Minnesota. Additionally, campaigning in Minneapolis and St. Paul, or up in Duluth, this  also benefits Donald Trump because the media markets for those two regions reach far into Wisconsin.  Running ads in the Twin Cities and Duluth media markets thus also have the benefit of being a two-fer.

            The reality of winning Minnesota is irrelevant. It is the tactic of forcing Joe Biden to campaign here for were he to take the state for granted. Minnesota might go the route of what it nearly did in 2016. When Hillary Clinton took the state for granted and nearly lost the state.

My latest interview appeared in Westlaw Today. 

Q&A: Will federal oversight improve Minneapolis policing?

2023 CIVILRBRF 0075

•

By Josh Numainville

WESTLAW TODAY Civil Rights Briefing

•

June 28, 2023

(June 28, 2023) - Law professor David Schultz explains the significance of a recent U.S. Department of Justice report that found persistent civil rights violations by the Minneapolis Police Department and discusses what his own research unearthed about the city's payouts for police misconduct claims.

Schultz, who recently released a first-of-its-kind statewide database1 on governmental payouts for police misconduct incidents in Minnesota, says the DOJ report raises important questions about how little Minneapolis has paid to resolve claims.

He cautions that while the MPD will be subject to a consent decree mandating certain reforms as a result of the DOJ's investigation, it will likely take years to see meaningful change.

Westlaw Today: What stood out to you about the DOJ's report on Minneapolis policing?

David Schultz: The DOJ report2 is perhaps the most comprehensive ever done on policing in Minneapolis, with a more detailed analysis and statistics than the Minnesota Department of Human Rights Report3 from last year. The latter report concluded, "A pattern or practice of discrimination is present where the denial of rights consists of something more than isolated, sporadic incidents, but is repeated, routine, or of a generalized nature."

The basic takeaway from the DOJ report is that the MPD violated First (free speech) and Fourth (illegal search and seizure) Amendment rights systematically, especially in terms of its use of force against people of color.

In reaching that conclusion it is first important to understand two points concerning the DOJ report. First, its focus is on the use of excessive force. It did look at other issues such as police stops and what is often called racial profiling, but most of the report examined racial disparities in terms of use of force. Second, the U.S. Supreme Court has said that questions about the use of force raise constitutional questions, defining them as a Fourth Amendment search and seizure issue.

The picture the report paints of Minneapolis is troubling. It reinforces a point that many of us in Minnesota have made for years — Minneapolis is a tale of two cities.

As the report states: "The typical white family in the Twin Cities is doing better than the national average for white families, and the typical Black family in the Twin Cities is doing worse than the national average for Black families."

The causes of the racial disparities are many, but when it comes to policing, the DOJ offers several stark conclusions:

• The MPD uses unnecessary or excessive force across a range of tactics that include physical restraint, tasers and weapons.
• Officers discriminate against people of color in their enforcement activities, including the use of force and traffic stops.
• Despite banning neck restraints in 2020, the MPD still uses them.
• Officers fail to intervene to prevent other officers from using excessive force and do not provide needed medical care.
• The MPD violates the First Amendment rights of protestors and the media to cover, photograph, or report on police misconduct.

Overall, the report reaches a series of conclusions that the MPD is out of compliance with the U.S. Constitution, in part because of poor or improper training or supervision.

WT: Were you surprised by the DOJ's findings?

DS: Nothing in this report came as a surprise, at least to me. There are two reasons for this. One, back in the 1990s I was a researcher at the Institute on Race and Poverty at the University of Minnesota, and we documented the extensive racial discrimination in Minneapolis, and we found the Twin Cities area to be one of the three most segregated metropolitan areas in the nation. Thus, the problems with race should not have been a surprise.

Second, in the early 2000s, I taught a class on police civil and criminal liability at Hamline University. Unfortunately, news of police misconduct and payouts for constitutional violations were a constant source of case studies for my students. I mentioned both of these points because they both frame my perspective on this report and suggest that there were many warnings ahead of the DOJ report.

WT: How will the DOJ's report shape Minneapolis policing going forward?

DS: The DOJ report comes with it a consent decree and federal monitoring of the city of Minneapolis. This is alongside a consent decree with the Minnesota Department of Human Rights. The city will be under legal obligation to undertake reforms. In the past, the city lacked the political will or ability to forge and implement reforms. The DOJ is asking for a lot of change — the question is whether the city can do this on its own or even as a result of possible litigation. Whatever happens, it is not going to occur overnight.

WT: Have other cities in the United States entered into consent decrees with the federal government over policing? Have those agreements led to meaningful reforms?

DS: Minneapolis is not alone. Albuquerque, New Mexico; Oakland, California; and Seattle, Washington; are but three examples of other cities that entered into consent decrees. The lesson from them is that reform is slow, complicated and expensive.

Do not expect reforms overnight — it could take years to see meaningful change. Change is incremental and requires new training, new personnel, and perhaps millions of dollars to finance it. The story in these cities is that meaningful reform requires a change in political and organizational culture. This is never easy, but reform can happen.

WT: You recently released your own report looking at how much local governments in Minnesota have paid to resolve police misconduct allegations. How much has Minneapolis paid out? How does the city compare to the rest of the state?

DS: After Minneapolis paid out $27 million to the family of George Floyd, many wondered how much governments pay out for police misconduct. Reporters from across the country asked me this question. I told them that nationally there is no database on this, nor is there one in Minnesota or any state. In previous research, I made some estimates that the amount was in the billions. I decided to construct a database for Minnesota and did this with the help of some students.

We surveyed all cities in Minnesota with populations of 5,000 or more; all 87 counties; and the State Patrol, Metro Transit, and the University of Minnesota Police. This produced an effective coverage of 98%-100% of the population of the state. Requests were sent to 239 governmental units asking for a list of all instances of police misconduct resulting in payouts from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020. Results were obtained from all 239 surveyed.

Here is a summary of what we learned:

• Nearly 30% of all governmental units made some form of payout.
• There were 490 incidents that resulted in payouts.
• The estimated total payout is $60,784,822.
• The estimated total payment for Minneapolis is $36,535,708.10.
• Minneapolis accounted for 60.1% of total payouts in the state.

For the entire state, the mean or average payout per incident was $124,500. For Minneapolis alone, the mean or average payout was $212,416. The mean or average for the rest of the state excluding Minneapolis was $76,255.

In Minneapolis, the median payout is between $26,282 and $28,010. For the rest of the state, it is $6,500. The overall median payout was $12,000.

WT: What else do we know about the incidents that resulted in payouts?

DS: My report asked for information about instances resulting in payouts, and they included use of force, property damage, improper and improper use of data, among other instances. However, the largest category was unspecified. We simply do not know or have sufficient data to tell us whether race or other factors were involved in an incident.

We need mandated statewide collection and standardization of data about police misconduct if we are going to seriously think about any policy change when it comes to policing.

WT: How does your report connect to the DOJ's findings?

DS: First, the DOJ report is only about Minneapolis. My report is statewide. Two, my report covers all instances of police misconduct which resulted in payouts. Third, the DOJ report gathers its own statistics to analyze, while my report is based on an analysis of self-reported data from governmental agencies. Fourth, the DOJ was able to discuss and examine race issues in Minneapolis. My statewide report lacked the data to do that.

Another way to view how the reports interact is in the focus on Minneapolis. The two reports look at different time frames but reach parallel conclusions on issues such as payouts for misconduct. But what jumps out is that the total instances of misconduct in Minneapolis and statewide may be higher than thought.

WT: Given the DOJ's findings, has Minneapolis paid about what you would expect to resolve police misconduct claims?

DS: I think Minneapolis has probably paid far less than it should. The DOJ report indicates thousands if not hundreds of potential situations where excessive or inappropriate force was used, or individuals were stopped in violation of their constitutional rights. Yet there were only 172 payouts reported for Minneapolis over the 10-year period I looked at.

If the DOJ report is accurate, there could have possibly been hundreds of other instances that should have resulted in payouts. Why the underreporting?

WT: Why do you think those other incidents did not result in payouts?

DS: What I discuss in my report is that in Minneapolis, and perhaps across the state and nationally, those who receive payouts are perhaps only a small fraction of those whose rights have been abused. For many, they do not know their rights were violated or they do not have the resources, such as an attorney, to mount the legal challenges to sue or negotiate compensation. Perhaps some fear retribution or perhaps some are not sympathetic plaintiffs who are in a position to fight for their rights.

While in general police do a good job under difficult situations, the scope of police misconduct outlined in the DOJ report suggests the cost of this misconduct in terms of violations of constitutional rights may be greater than I estimated. Finally, I have spoken to other researchers gathering information suggesting the cost to victims in terms of medical bills, psychological damage, etc., may also suggest victims have been undercompensated.

Notes

1 https://bit.ly/437oFGE

2 https://bit.ly/44dwVFM

3https://bit.ly/435WCXU

By Josh Numainville

Policing in Minneapolis and Across Minnesota: What Two Reports Say

 

Two recent reports describe challenges for policing  specifically for Minneapolis and Minnesota more generally.  The first report was the Department of Justice’s Report on policing in Minneapolis that ties into a federal consent decree for reform in that city.  The second report is mine regarding what we know about policing across the State of Minnesota.

Minneapolis and the Department of Justice Report

            The Department of Justice initiated an investigation into police practices in the City of Minneapolis (MPD) after the murder of George Floyd.  The report is perhaps the  most comprehensive ever done on policing in Minneapolis, with a more detailed analysis and use of statistics than the Minnesota Department of Human Rights Report from last year.  The latter report had concluded  “A pattern or practice of discrimination is present where the denial of rights consists of something more than isolated, sporadic incidents, but is repeated, routine, or of a generalized nature.”

The basic takeaway from the DOJ report is that the police department violated the First (free speech) and Fourth (illegal search and seizure) Amendment rights systematically, especially in terms of its application of use of force against people of color.

            In reaching that conclusion it is first important to understand two points concerning the DOJ Report.  First, its focus is on the  use of (excessive) force.  It did look at other issues such as police stops and what is often called racial profiling, but most of the report examined racial disparities in terms of use of force.  Second, the US Supreme Court has said that questions of use of force raise constitutional questions, defining them as a Fourth Amendment search and seizure issue.

            Overall the picture the report paints of Minneapolis is  troubling.   It introduces us to a point many of us have made for years in places such as here and here—Minneapolis is a tale of two cities.  As the Report states: 

By nearly all of these measures, the typical white family in the Twin Cities is doing better than the national average for white families, and the typical Black family in the Twin Cities doing worse than the national average or Black families. The median Black family in the Twin Cities earns just 44% as much as the median white family, and the poverty rate among Black households is nearly five times higher than the rate among white households. Of the United States’ 100 largest metropolitan areas, only one has a larger gap between Black and white earnings.

 

The cause of the racial disparities are many, but when it comes to policing, the DOJ offers several stark  conclusions.  In examining thousands of uses of force, the Report concluded:

 

Our investigation showed that MPD officers routinely use excessive force, often when no force is necessary. We found that MPD officers often use unreasonable force (including deadly force) to obtain immediate compliance with orders, often forgoing meaningful de-escalation tactics and instead using force to subdue people. MPD’s pattern or practice of using excessive force violates the law.

 

MPD officers often used neck restraints in situations that did not end in an arrest. MPD officers used neck restraints during at least 198 encounters from January 1, 2016, to August 16, 2022.

 

Despite banning neck restraints  in 2020, the MPD still used them.

 

The Report documents the use of unnecessary or excessive force across a range of tactics that include physical restraint, tasers, and weapons.  And there appears to be a racial disparity in such use of force.

 

Additionally, the MPD fails to provide needed medical care and officers are failing to intervene  to prevent other officers from using excessive force.

 

The DOJ Report also describes disparate treatment when it comes to traffic stops and searches. For example, it concludes that “We estimate that MPD stops Black people at 6.5 times the rate at which it stops white people, given their shares of the population. Similarly, we estimate  MPD stops Native American people at 7.9 times the rate at which it stops white people, given population shares.”

 

Finally, the Report documents significant violations of the First Amendment rights of protestors and the media to cover, photograph, or report on police misconduct. 

 

Overall the Report reaches a series of conclusions that the Minneapolis Police Department is out of compliance with the Constitution, in part as a result of poor or improper training or supervision. Necessitating the  City enter into a consent decree and agree to remedial action.  

 

The Price of Injustice: Taxpayer Payouts for Police Misconduct in Minnesota

 

But is Minneapolis alone?  This is the question I sought to answer in my report that was recently released and updated. 

 

After Minneapolis paid out $27 million to the family of George Floyd  many wondered how much governments payout for police misconduct.  Nationally there is no database on this, nor is there one in Minnesota or any state.  In previous research I made some estimates that the amount was in the billions. I decided to construct a database for Minnesota.

 

We surveyed all cities in Minnesota with populations of 5,000 or more;  all 87 counties; and the State Patrol, Metro Transit, and the University of Minnesota Police.  This produced an effective coverage of 98%-100% of the population of the state.  Requests were sent to a total of 239 governmental units asking for  a list of all instances of police misconduct resulting in payouts from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020.  Results were obtained from all 239 surveyed.

 

Here is a summary of what we learned.

 

Nearly 30% of all governmental units made some form of payout.

 

There were a total of  490 incidents that resulted in payouts.

 

The estimated  total payout is  $60,784,822.

 

The estimated total payment for Minneapolis is $36,535,708.10.

 

Minneapolis accounted for 60.1% of total payouts in the state during the ten-year time period.

 

For the entire state the mean or average payout per incident was $124,500.  For Minneapolis alone, the mean or average payout was $212, 416.   The mean or average for the rest of the state excluding Minneapolis was $76, 255. 

 

In Minneapolis the median payout is between $26,282 and $28,010.  For the rest of the state it is $6,500.  The overall median pay out was $12,000.

 

My report also asked for information about instances resulting in payouts, and they included use of force, property damage, improper  and improper use of data, among other instances. However, the largest category was unspecified.  We simply do not know or have sufficient data to tell us the factors such as race that led to specific  police misconduct.

 

The conclusion of the study was that gathering this data was difficult and time consuming and there is still too much we do not know.  I conclude that we need mandated statewide collection and standardization of data about police misconduct if we are going to seriously think about any policy change when it comes to policing.

 

How the Two Reports Interact

 

First, the DOJ report is only about Minneapolis.  My report is statewide.  Two, my report covers all instances of police misconduct which resulted in payouts.  Third, the DOJ report gathers its own statistics to analyze, while my report is based on an analysis of self-reported  data from the governmental agencies.  Fourth, the DOJ was able to discuss and examine race issues in Minneapolis, my statewide report lacked the data to do that.

 

One pushback I received on my report is that not all instances of misconduct are really misconduct.  However, the information reported here is self-reported and governmental entities could  have opted not to report if they did not deem it misconduct.  Two, even if police disagree, my report documented misconduct resulting in settlements by the reporting governmental entity.  Whatever happened the reporting jurisdiction decided that they had to make payouts for what their police did.

 

However, another way to view how the reports interact is in the focus on Minneapolis.  The two reports look at different time frames but reach parallel conclusions on  issues such as payouts for misconduct.   But what jumps out is that  the total instances of misconduct in Minneapolis and statewide may be higher than thought.

 

My study reports 172 instances in Minneapolis over a ten-year period that resulted in payouts for police misconduct.  If the DOJ report is accurate, there could have possibly been hundreds of other  instances that  should have resulted in payouts.  Why the under-reporting?

 

In my study I hypothesize that  of all the instances  where police and civilians interact, only a fraction of them may be circumstances where something goes wrong. Of those, only a fraction involve situations where civilians know something went wrong and then file a complaint or lawsuit and then of those, only some result in payouts. What the DOJ report suggests is that the number and percentage of misconduct in Minneapolis is probably greater than my report indicates.  This too may be true statewide.

 

Overall, the conclusion of my report is that we need to understand what happened in the instances where payouts occurred and  use them as case studies to help formulate policy change. The DOJ diagnoses the problems in Minneapolis and offers recommendations for change. Whether what is happening in Minneapolis is generalizable to all of Minnesota we still do not know, and neither the DOJ or my report can answer that question.

 

Rout and Route: What Happens to Minnesota Democrats on and After Election day 2022

There is the real possibility that Minnesota politics could be a rout this November.  It would be a rout of

the DFL and a major victory for the Republican party, potentially putting the latter in charge for the first time since 1984-1986 when it was the last time the GOP controlled the state legislature and the governorship.  It might also represent the culmination of the Trump and Republican Party effort that first started in 2016 to flip the Midwest.  Of all that happens, what is the route for the Democrats after election day?

The National Scene
Six months ago it would have been an easy prediction to argue this election cycle nationally and statewide was favorable to Republicans.   Generally the president’s party does badly in midterm elections, losing an average of 26 House seats. Six months ago Biden had approval ratings of about 40%, Voters disapproved of the president’s handling of the economy despite the fact that there was record low unemployment and the strongest labor-wage  market in years. For voters the economy was inflation at the gas pump and grocery store.  Voters were also concerned about crime.

Nationally Democrats had either no narrative or a bad narrative when it came to the economy or crime.  But then the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade and abortion saved the Democrats, temporarily.  For several months abortion was the major Democrat talking point nationally and in Minnesota, and it appeared to save them as it motivated many groups, including college educated suburban women.

Until a month ago or even less it looked like abortion would save Democrats. But national polls suggest that abortion has run its course.  The economy or inflation and crime are the top two issues by far, with abortion third or even lower.  This is even true among suburban women.  Polls now suggest that US Senate races where the Democrats were once favored, such as in Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, are tightening and it is possible Republicans could prevail.

Minnesota
Minnesota is an American political microcosm.  MPR and Survey USA (KSTP) polls point to an electorate worried about inflation or the economy and crime.  This includes suburban voters.  Polls suggest a close race for governor’s race, Attorney General, Auditor, and even Secretary of State.  Depending on voter mobilization and how the few undecided voters break, these races could go DFL or GOP.  Many think the GOP will win at least the AG and State Auditor.   The DFL holds a narrow majority in the Minnesota House and the Republicans a small but solid majority in the Senate.  The only real tight Congressional race is in the Second District where DFL incumbent Angie Craig holds (according to internal polls) about a one-point lead over GOP Tyler Kistner.  

While I see no chance for the DFL to flip the Senate I am also doubtful that it will hold the House. It is thus entirely possible for the DFL to get swept out of the four statewide offices and lose the second Congressional District.

Were the above to happen, what went right for the Republicans or wrong for the Democrats?

Messaging and Strategy
One answer is that the results in Minnesota are determined by national trends.  An unpopular president, inflation, and crime are macro forces beyond the control of anyone in Minnesota. Republicans rode the wave and Democrats got buried in it.  But such an explanation ignores too much.

Nationally Democrats had no message or narrative on inflation or crime.  Granted there is little a president can do to address inflation, but the talking points were awful or next to none.  The same is true with crime. Biden and the Democrats could have stolen a page from Bill Clinton  and proposed money to hire 100,000 police but they did not.  Instead, they became painted yet again as soft on crime.
The same problem exists in Minnesota. Walz and the Democrats relied too much on abortion to save them.   They were tagged two years ago as soft on crime with the riots after George Floyd’s death.  They were tagged with the defund the police movement and failed to articulate a narrative of public safety.  In terms of the economy there may be little they can do at the state level to address inflation. But the fact that they failed to craft a narrative is a problem.

Moreover, the strategy was bad.  Walz sat on his lead and cash advantage and avoided debating.  It cost him dearly. Recent KSTP polls point to a weakening of his support in his former First Congressional District.

Effectively, Walz and the Democrats have written off all but the Metro region.  In 2018 Walz won 20 of Minnesota’s counties. In 2016 Clinton won 9 counties, in 2020 Biden won 13 counties and Tina Smith 15 counties.  The base of the DFL is narrow and counts on high mobilization in a few Metro area counties.

I spend a lot of time traveling the state to lecture and give talks.  It is clear the Metro DFL agenda on crime, the environment, and social issues don’t play there.  The Metro area DFL, party activists here, or the convention attendees and activists are out of touch with the rest of the state, and perhaps with many leaning DFL in Greater Minnesota and even in the suburbs.  As noted above, polls suggest erosion of support for the Democrats in most locations across the state, including in the metro suburbs and among college-educated women.

Summary: Rout and Route?
To state clearly–The DFL and Walz may have a message out of touch with most Minnesotans who are nowhere near as progressive as the Metro area or core Twin Cities activists. This in turn  renders their strategy to win difficult because it is one narrowly confined or defined to a narrow base.  Moreover the messaging or narrative fails to understand the depth of concern regarding crime and  the economy and its focuses too much upon an agenda that appeals to the progressive wing of the party.  Couple that with a campaign strategy that aims to mobilize only in a few counties, that fails to counter the GOP narrative, that focuses too much on abortion this year, and which, in the case of Walz, sat on a lead, one then gets the makings for a rout.

If that rout occurs, the question on the day after the election will be to ask what route should the DFL have taken to avoid the rout, and what direction should it take going forward?

Why schools fail: a view from a college professor

 My latest was an oped in the Star Tribune.

Why schools fail: a view from a college professor

We need to let teachers teach. 

By David Schultz OCTOBER 22, 2022 — 6:00PM

“The ACT and its SAT competitor are poor predictors of college performance, at best only telling us a small fraction of what factors affect student success,” David Schultz writes.

Declining Minnesota ACT scores may be a problem. But even disregarding test numbers, there is a problem in how well our schools are preparing students for college.

This is what I see as a college professor.

ACT is a standardized test taken by high school students and it is used by colleges along with grades as admission criteria. ACT scores have declined nationally in recent years. This newspaper also reported how the most recent scores for the Minnesota class of 2022 are the lowest in at least a decade. The low scores seem not to be the product simply of the pandemic. They began falling dramatically in 2016 and continue to slide.

There are reasons to dismiss the ACT slide. The ACT and its SAT competitor are poor predictors of college performance, at best only telling us a small fraction of what factors affect student success. They are also racially and class biased, with numerous studies pointing to how they discriminate against people of color and the poor. They are partially coachable; families that can pay for a college prep class can improve their children's test scores and access more elite schools.

Tests such as the ACT are part of a self-perpetrating cycle of elitism that stratifies American education along racial and class divisions. For these reasons and others many colleges are abandoning the ACT.

Nonetheless, declining ACT scores portend problems regarding what we teach and do in K-12 and the college-readiness of many of our students.

I write from the perspective of a 30-year-plus college professor who has taught thousands of undergraduate students at four-year public and private schools and also at the community college level. At one time I wanted to be a high school teacher. I regularly visit and teach at public and private high schools across the metro region at the request of teachers. Often the students involved are in advanced placement classes. I see students in the postsecondary enrollment options program (PSEO), and I do teacher training for high school teachers.

What I see and hear is not good.

When I talk to high school teachers they often ask me what I am looking for in college students and what can they do to prepare them to succeed in college. When I tell them what I want they agree that what they are doing is not what the students need.

It is not because the high school teachers are bad — I often work with the best — or that the unions protect bad teachers as conservatives charge, or that public schools are inherently bad. It is because schools and politicians do not let teachers teach.

Schools and curriculum are so standardized-test driven that teachers do not have the opportunity to work with students to develop critical thinking, problem solving, other substantive skills or bodies of knowledge, or to talk about things that won't be tested.

The problem started perhaps with No Child Left Behind under the Bush administration and it has only turned worse. This factory model of education constipates learning and education.

In my first teacher's education class my professor drew a triangle on the board, labeling the three corners school, home and community. He said it took all three to properly educate children.

Students are only in school a few hours for less than 180 days per year. Alone, schools cannot educate. Society ignores the importance of stable and healthy families and integrated and safe neighborhoods in supporting education. In a state with horrible race and class disparities it is no surprise so many fail in school.

But failing the poor and people of color is only part of the problem.

I see a persistent decline in basic skills and knowledge. To be educated is about what you know and how you know it. It is not simply rote memorization for a standardized test. Too many students lack college skills. Many do not know how to outline. Many do not know how to take notes in class. Few know what a literature review is. They are not taught how to read a book and analyze plot and characters.

Many students do not know how to study. They are spending less time on homework now than a few years ago. Many lack the grit to work through assignments. Many enter college unprepared.

The culture war students' parents and the political parties are fighting corrupts learning. This was happening well before the recent hysteria and backlash over critical race theory. Education is not about reinforcing but about challenging preconceived biases and beliefs. From both the right and the left I see a refusal to confront ugly facts challenging their biases.

I also see, more now than a few years ago, intolerance for disagreement and a lack of empathy for intellectual diversity.

We live in a state that is a national educational leader. We have open enrollment, charter schools, magnet schools. There are also repeated calls for vouchers. There is minimal evidence these gimmicks have made much difference in terms of college preparation.

When I tell my high school teachers what students need to succeed they concur. For them, the failure is not junior high or elementary school, it is the entire way we educate.