Pawlenty, Tim gov

===

180'd

===

lee fang on lobbying deregister

<a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/178494/lee-fang-rise-shadow-lobbying#">http://www.thenation.com/blog/178494/lee-fang-rise-shadow-lobbying#</a>

<a href="http://www.thenation.com/print/article/178460/shadow-lobbying-complex">http://www.thenation.com/print/article/178460/shadow-lobbying-complex</a>

<div class="print-created" style=" font-size: small; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">Lee Fang | February 19, 2014</div>

It was 4 o’clock in the afternoon, and I found myself hanging around the House-side entrance to the Capitol building, hoping to interview lawmakers during the protracted government shutdown in October. The members had been called by the Republican leadership to open just one slice of the government without authorizing funds for the Affordable Care Act, a partial solution that had rallied Democrats in opposition. As dusk settled in, I lingered to interview the representatives as they walked in and out of what everyone considered at this point to be a scene of political theater.

</fieldset>

While I waited, a small crowd gathered, composed of men and women in business attire, creating something of a receiving line where they could exchange pleasantries with members of Congress as the latter made their way from their offices across Independence Avenue to cast a perfunctory vote. The city, with hundreds of thousands of federal workers sent home from the job, was far from dead. On Capitol Hill, the real financial engine of Washington, the selling of access and policy hummed along at full speed, and I was in the midst of it.

Many of the people assembled around me, I noticed, were former lawmakers and their associates. Former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle was there, along with officials from his firm DLA Piper, to escort a group of international attorneys into a meeting with lawmakers. Men who said they were with Alston & Bird, another law firm heavily involved in lobbying, convened a few feet away. A cluster of businessmen with the credit-rating firm Experian prepped their own series of meetings with congressional staff.

Behind me, I heard the distinctive croak of Zach Wamp, a former congressman who was busy talking up his new job to current members of Congress. He boasted that he is now working for Palantir, the controversial intelligence contractor. “I’m kind of overseeing their operations up here,” Wamp said when I asked what he does for Palantir. He ended the conversation abruptly when questioned about the scandals associated with the firm, which include allegations of spying on activists and other privacy violations.

I returned to a computer later that day and pulled up the lobbyist-registration database to run the few names I had managed to write down. In theory, lobbyists are required to register under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) to give the public some idea about who is attempting to influence the laws and regulations that govern us. To my surprise, however, Wamp and most of the others were nowhere to be found. (Palantir’s corporate counsel, Matt Long, would not comment on what Wamp does for the company.)

Daschle, a “policy adviser” to a range of corporate interests and a close confidant of many top Democrats, has become one of the most famous unregistered lobbyists in the city. In fact, his escapades as a consigliere and go-between for business leaders and politicians, including President Obama, are so well known that among ethics watchdogs, the technicality in the law that allows lobbyists to evade registration has become known as the “Daschle Loophole.” 

Officially, Shrinking—Unofficially, Exploding

On paper, the lobbying industry is quickly disappearing. In January, records indicated that for a third straight year, overall spending on lobbying decreased. Lobbyists themselves continue to deregister. In 2013, the number of registered lobbyists dipped to 12,281, the lowest number on file since 2002.

But experts say that lobbying isn’t dying; instead, it’s simply going underground. The problem, says American University professor James Thurber, who has studied congressional lobbying for more than thirty years, is that “most of what is going on in Washington is not covered” by the lobbyist-registration system. Thurber, who is currently advising the American Bar Association’s lobbying-reform task force, adds that his research suggests the true number of working lobbyists is closer to 100,000.

A loophole-ridden law, poor enforcement, the development of increasingly sophisticated strategies that enlist third-party validators and create faux-grassroots campaigns, along with an Obama administration executive order that gave many in the profession a disincentive to register—all of these forces have combined to produce a near-total collapse of the system that was designed to keep tabs on federal lobbying.

While the official figure puts the annual spending on lobbying at $3.2 billion in 2013, Thurber estimates that the industry brings in more than $9 billion a year. Other experts have made similar estimates, but no one is sure how large the industry has become. Lee Drutman, a lobbying expert at the Sunlight Foundation, says that at least twice as much is spent on lobbying as is officially reported.

Trade association documents, bankruptcy filings and reports from political consulting firms reviewed by The Nation show that many of America’s largest corporations have spent much more on lobbying than they’ve officially disclosed. In some cases, the quarterly registration system, used by the public and journalists, shows only one-tenth of the amount that firms spend to win favorable treatment by the federal government.

This explosion in spending on lobbying activities may not be visible in the lobbyist-registration system, but it is evident in Washington. The growth of the influence industry has created a new generation of millionaires while reshaping the region in its wake. The District of Columbia skyline, once dominated by monuments, is now dotted with cranes building some $5.5 billion in new development. The 14th Street and H Street corridors, formerly gritty sections of the city, are lined with more than forty new bars and restaurants. Census figures show that four of the five wealthiest counties in the country are now DC suburbs. In one of those counties—Fairfax—high-end carmakers Tesla and Aston Martin have opened new operations to keep up with demand.

The new captains of the influence-peddling industry lobby openly and with no interest in registration, reaping huge financial rewards. Tim Pawlenty, in his first two months as head of a lobbying association for financial companies that include Barclays and Wells Fargo, made more than double his annual $120,000 salary as governor of Minnesota. The self-described “Sam’s Club Republican” earns over $1.8 million a year working largely on banking regulations. He is not a registered lobbyist.

Chris Dodd, the former Democratic presidential candidate who pledged not to become a lobbyist once he retired from the Senate in 2010, made $3.3 million in his second year as chief of the movie industry lobby. (Dodd’s salary increased as he led the Motion Picture Association of America through a failed effort to pass an intellectual-property bill called the Stop Online Piracy Act, better known as SOPA.) Technically, however, Dodd hasn’t broken his pledge: though he seeks to win policy victories for his Hollywood-based members, he is not registered as a lobbyist.

Rather than using the L-word to describe what they do, many lobbyists prefer the more banal rubric of “government relations” or “government affairs.” Reflecting this trend, the American League of Lobbyists—a professional association for the industry—changed its name in November to the Association of Government Relations Professionals. And while lobbyists must report their payments from clients, those ducking the system quietly bring in the biggest paydays.

Apple’s former vice president of “worldwide government affairs,” Catherine Novelli, earned over $7.5 million last year while helping the company deal with congressional inquiries about its alleged tax-dodging strategies, without registering as a lobbyist. Deborah Lee James, until recently the vice president for government affairs at SAIC, a major defense contractor, earned nearly $1 million in 2013 despite also being unregistered.

</div>

===

mnn: not sure on date

<h4>Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty</h4>

</div>

<div>Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty is another green-leaning Republican state leader. He founded and co-chaired the National Governors Association's Securing a Clean Energy Future task force along with former Kansas Gov. (and Democrat) Kathleen Sebelius (now serving the Obama administration as Secretary of Health and Human Services) and he led talks among 45 state leaders to develop programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. While Pawlenty isn't afraid to appeal to the base every now and then — he backpedaled on the idea of a cap-and-trade system while on the Glenn Beck program and argued that humans didn't have much of an impact on global warming — it's important to remember that at least he was for it before he was against it.</div>

===

Some senior Republicans who have left the battlefield of electoral politics are starting to go vocal with their worries about their party’s stance on climate change—and to take action to stave off its electoral consequences. They fear, in the words of one GOP operative, “that the party is going to drive itself off a cliff with this.”

Conservative economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a senior adviser on McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign who now heads the American Action Forum, a center-right think tank, is working with the climate-policy advocacy group Clean Air-Cool Planet. The New Hampshire-based group has flown Holtz-Eakin to the state several times over the past few months to talk to voters in small living-room meetings about the economic threats of climate change—and the economic benefits of addressing the problem.

Another prominent Republican, John Warner, the former senator from Virginia and secretary of the Navy, is a senior adviser to the Pew Project on National Security, Energy, and Climate, which focuses on the need to develop alternative energy to combat climate change and lessen U.S. dependence on foreign oil. Warner, who cosponsored a major cap-and-trade bill when he was in the Senate, now travels the country, including stops at military bases, calling attention to the national-security concerns of climate change and fossil-fuel dependence.

Working with Warner on the Pew climate-change project is George Shultz, President Reagan’s secretary of State and an adviser to George W. Bush’s 2000 presidential campaign. Last year, Shultz, who is a distinguished fellow at Stanford University, cochaired the “No on Prop. 23” campaign in California, which successfully defended the state’s pioneering cap-and-trade law against an oil industry-led effort to overturn it.

“My own opinion is that this problem is very real,” Shultz told National Journal. “I recognize there are a lot of people pooh-poohing it. Whether they like the science or not, there’s a huge problem coming at us. There’s a huge melt coming in the Arctic regions. There’s melting taking place.” Of Perry and other Republicans who deny climate science, Shultz said, “They’re entitled to their opinion, but they’re not entitled to the facts.”

Former GOP Rep. Bob Inglis of South Carolina, who lost his primary race last year in part because he acknowledged climate change, gives speeches and lectures across the country about the need for conservatives to do likewise and begin working on solutions to the problem. Otherwise, the Republican Party will be labeled antiscience, he warns. Inglis takes his message directly to conservative strongholds such as Federalist clubs and meetings of the Conservative Political Action Conference.

“Being branded as antiscience is not a good future for us,” Inglis told National Journal. “How can we say to young people, we’re dismissing science? That’s not a good place for our party to be, and it’s not historically where we’ve been. There are conservative voices that will hopefully show the way back to conservatism and away from a populist rejection of science.”

On November 8, William Reilly, who ran the Environmental Protection Agency under President George H.W. Bush, blasted his party’s stance on science in a widely reported speech. “For some of the most prominent leaders of the Republican Party, science has left the building,” he said. “Science doesn’t feature prominently in these debates. Republicans once were the party of science where environmental policy was concerned,” Reilly contended. Of House Republicans’ recent unanimous vote to overturn EPA’s scientific finding that climate change poses a public health threat, he said, “There was no explanation justifying a position at odds with the findings of 11 National Academies of Science, including our own.”

Another longtime GOP ally, Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, is also disturbed by the party’s shift toward science denial. Anderson, who is Tim Pawlenty’s pastor and worked with the former Minnesota governor on his state climate-change initiatives, in 2006 joined with other prominent evangelicals in sending a letter to President George W. Bush arguing that no legitimate scientific debate remained on the merits of climate science and that evangelicals had a moral obligation to solve a problem that threatens the world’s most vulnerable people.

“Most evangelicals in other countries believe that there is climate change and that we need to do something. It seems to be an American position to deny that,” Anderson told National Journal. “It’s curious to me that there are people who have taken strong positions and then changed them. Many of the candidates were expressing concern four or five years ago. Whenever there are sea changes on particular issues and many get on board, you wonder what changed the political or cultural climate.”

===

<div class="print-site_name">Published on Alternet (<a href="http://www.alternet.org">http://www.alternet.org</a>)</div>

<div class="print-breadcrumb"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/">Home</a> > Tim Pawlenty Leaves Romney Campaign to Lobby for Banks that Crashed the Economy</div>

<h2 class="node-title">Tim Pawlenty Leaves Romney Campaign to Lobby for Banks that Crashed the Economy</h2>

<div class="submitted">Submitted by Lauren Kelley on Thu, 2012-09-20 07:57</div>

<div class="field-label">Headline: </div>

<div class="field-item even">Tim Pawlenty Leaves Romney Campaign to Lobby for Banks that Crashed the Economy</div>

</div>

Whatever aspirations Tim Pawlenty may have had about snagging the vice presidency in a hypothetical Mitt Romney administration are officially over, as the former Minnesota governor takes a big-wig financial industry lobbying job.

The <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2012/president/candidates/romney/2012/09/20/pawlenty-resigns-from-romney-campaign-lobby/vi30eLiSvys9rWVoZpCa1O/story.html">AP reports</a> [1] that Pawlenty is stepping down from his role as national co-chair of the Romney campaign to take the gig at Financial Services Roundtable, which starts November 1. Pawlenty will be CEO of the lobbying group, which represents Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo among its 100 or so clients. The <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-pawlenty-bank-lobbyist-financial-servies-roundtable-20120920,0,6279069.story">LA Times</a> [2]:

Pawlenty suceeds Steve Bartlett, a former Republican congressman from Texas who has headed the group since 1999. He announced his retirement this year and Pawlenty will take over on Nov. 1.

The Financial Services Roundtable is a key player in Washington and has worked limit the impact on the industry of some provisions of the Dodd-Frank financial reform law. When the legislation was passed in 2010, Bartlett said, "There is plenty here to like and a good bit to question."

</blockquote>

So Pawlenty had wanted to be president this year, but decided lobbying for the nation's mega-banks was his next best bet. That should tell us something about his priorities as a former -- and perhaps future -- presidential hopeful. <a href="http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2012/09/1_2_3_the_night.shtml">MPR's Bob Collins</a> [3]:

Pawlenty will get tons of face time on the business channels on television. Those are the kind of friends and the kind of exposure that can get you elected president, a position that's easier to get from Washington than Minnesota.

But what the move shows is that even after a collapsed economy, largely spawned by the practices of the financial services industry, there's no political stain to be had by throwing in with the industry.

</blockquote>

The revolving door goes 'round and 'round and 'round and 'round...

The real question though is whether Pawlenty plans to tell Wall Street to "get its snout out of the trough" in his new role, as he did in the video below in June 2011. No? You don't think so? (<a href="https://twitter.com/cyn3matic/status/248773914463989760">hat tip</a> [4])

api pays his consultants to astroturf

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/pawlenty-questioned-ief-advocates_n_917621.html

----

He wouldn't be the first governor to become more radical to pursue presidential ambitions. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R) also <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/24/tim-pawlenty/pawlenty-changes-coursse-cap-and-trade/">abandoned</a> his clean-energy leadership (and his most significant legislative accomplishments) when the "drill, baby, drill" non-solution rose to prominence in 2008.

===

more on 180

retooled for TP: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/05/tim-pawlenty-political-opponents_n_890561.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=070611&utm_medium=email&utm_content=NewsEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief

<h1 class="headline">5. <a href="http://www.grist.org/list/2011-05-06-republican-debate-present-pawlenty-vs.-past-pawlenty-on-cap-and-" title="Republican debate: Present Pawlenty vs. Past Pawlenty on cap-and-trade" class="article-title">Republican debate: Present Pawlenty vs. Past Pawlenty on cap-and-trade</a></h1>

By <a href="http://www.grist.org/people/Sarah+Laskow">Sarah Laskow</a>

6 May 2011 11:09 AM

Tim Pawlenty may have once promoted cap-and-trade as a response to climate change, but now he considers that choice a "battle scar.” Because nothing’s more traumatic than caving to peer pressure.

"We all [have ‘clunkers’ on our records], and that's one of mine," <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/159635-pawlenty-on-past-cap-and-trade-support-i-was-wrong-it-was-a-mistake-and-im-sorry">he said last night</a> at the first debate in the Republican primary. "I just admit it. I don't try to duck it, bob it, weave it, try to explain it away." He does, however, reverse course, backpedal, disown, and disinherit it.

<img src="/850ba07a-b0c5-5e9e-9b4d-b5777deeaa8d.gif"/> <a data-toggle-selector="#item-2011-05-06-republican-debate-present-pawlenty-vs.-past-pawlenty-on-cap-and- .article-body,#item-2011-05-06-republican-debate-present-pawlenty-vs.-past-pawlenty-on-cap-and- .article-body" href="http://www.grist.org/list/2011-05-06-republican-debate-present-pawlenty-vs.-past-pawlenty-on-cap-and-" title="read more: Republican debate: Present Pawlenty vs. Past Pawlenty on cap-and-trade">CONTINUE READING ...</a>

</div>

Tim Pawlenty may have once promoted cap-and-trade as a response to climate change, but now he considers that choice a "battle scar.” Because nothing’s more traumatic than caving to peer pressure.

Pawlenty has been particularly vocal about disowning cap-and-trade in recent months, perhaps because he's a bit of flip-flopping fish out of water in a field of Republican presidential contenders far to his right. But according to the former Minnesota governor, he's been trying to walk back his support for cap-and-trade for years.

"I sent a letter to Congress, I think, about two years ago and at other times have said, I was wrong, it was a mistake, and I'm sorry. It's ham-fisted, it's going to be harmful to the economy," he said.

===

Tim Pawlenty  [UPDATED]

Former governor of Minnesota

Pawlenty used to be a champion of moderate climate action, but he's changed his tune in the last couple of years. (We sense a theme.)

On climate science: In 2007, while announcing a new state climate commission, <a href="http://spectator.org/archives/2007/07/23/republican-governors-who-wilt">he said</a>, "our global climate is warming, at least in part due to the energy sources we use."

But by 2010, Pawlenty was emphasizing uncertainty rather than warming. "The climate's obviously changing," <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35493976/ns/meet_the_press/">he said</a> on Meet the Press. "But the real question and the more interesting question is how much of that is manmade, how much of that is the result of natural causes and patterns? And, of course, we've seen a lot of data manipulation and a lot of controversy or at least debate within the scientific community."

On climate policy: In 2007, Pawlenty <a href="http://www.pewclimate.org/what_s_being_done/in_the_states/mggra">signed his state up</a> for the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord, a regional cap-and-trade system, and <a href="http://www.state.mn.us/portal/mn/jsp/content.do?id=-536882793&contentid=536913503&contenttype=EDITORIAL&programid=536912013&agency=Commerce">signed a bill</a> requiring that 25 percent of Minnesota's electricity come from renewable sources by 2025. In 2008, he (unsuccessfully) <a href="http://www.startribune.com/local/15909027.html">pushed a climate initiative</a> while he was chair of the National Governors Association, and <a href="http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/16008122.html">gave a speech</a> calling for climate action at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

"I support a reasonable cap-and-trade system," <a href="http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=0B947C4D-9044-DA7D-A449949F50FB724F">Pawlenty said</a> in 2008, when he was gunning for the VP slot on McCain's ticket. "I think it'd be good for the federal government to take that up rather than have states take it up as clusters of regions."

But two years later, he changed his tune: "[W]e should all be in favor of reducing pollution. But we need to do that in ways that don't burden the economy. Cap-and-trade, I think, would be a disaster in that regard," <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35493976/ns/meet_the_press/">he said</a> on Meet the Press.

Pawlenty spokesperson Alex Conant <a href="http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=0B947C4D-9044-DA7D-A449949F50FB724F">explained the switch</a>: "Gov. Pawlenty and many others considered cap-and-trade approaches, but concluded it's the wrong approach and doesn't support it. Over the last couple of years he has fought to stop the Democrats' cap-and-trade proposals because they're bureaucratic, clumsy and hurt the economy."

UPDATE, 2/15/11: At the CPAC conference in February 2011, Pawlenty <a href="http://spectator.org/blog/2011/02/11/pawlenty-on-past-support-for-c">walked back even further</a> from his previous support for cap-and-trade: "Have I changed my position? Yes. But I'm not going to be cute about it, hem and haw, be dippy and dancy about it. Just saying yeah, it was a mistake, it was stupid. It was wrong."

UPDATE, 4/22/11: <a href="http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/tim-pawlenty-will-steger-climate-change">Mother Jones reports</a> on how Pawlenty had worked closely with Arctic explorer Will Steger to raise awareness of climate change, but then abruptly stopped collaborating in 2008 when his national profile started to rise. Steger says he's "baffled" by Pawlenty's change of position on climate change.

grist

----

180 in MoJo:

<a href="http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/tim-pawlenty-will-steger-climate-change">http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/tim-pawlenty-will-steger-climate-change</a>

Thu Apr. 21, 2011 3:31 PM PDT

When Will Steger was 15 years old, he and his brother piloted an old motorboat down the Mississippi River from Minnesota to New Orleans. At 17, he journeyed to the Arctic. At 41, he became the first man in history to travel unsupported to the North Pole and come back alive. He's traveled across Antarctica by sled (another first), hopped freights, and found his purpose at a mountain monastery.

But there's just one challenge the Arctic explorer couldn't complete: Keeping Tim Pawlenty honest on global warming.

After working closely with Steger for two years to combat climate change, the former Minnesota governor and current GOP presidential contender abruptly reversed himself on the issue in 2008, just as his name was being floated as a possible presidential running mate for Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). Steger and Pawlenty haven't spoken since. Today, the politician who once cut a radio ad with Janet Napolitano calling for a federal cap on greenhouse gas emissions calls his work on climate change "stupid" and says the science is uncertain at best.

"I'm baffled by that—did he actually say that?" says Steger, when asked about Pawlenty's recent statements. "I'm baffled by that. But I think he's getting information from the wrong source and it's really too bad for our children. It's reckless."

Advertise on MotherJones.com

After years of chasing records—dogsledding across Greenland, attempting a solo canoe trip from the North Pole to Canada—and raising awareness on environmental issues, Steger began narrowing his focus to global warming in 2006. He was witnessing firsthand the effect of global warming on the frozen north: Ice shelves began breaking apart; spring—such as it was—would come in May, not July, and last longer; the trans-Arctic sled routes that made him famous became impassible due to open water. Through the Will Steger Foundation, he began shifting the focus of his work from exploration to preservation.

Similar to Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, Steger put together his own Powerpoint presentation documenting his experiences, then began appearing at schools, churches, and business groups across the state to pitch his message. He'd usually bring along a climate scientist for good measure—lure them in with the sled dogs, the thinking went, and they'll stick around for the policy. And in the conservative governor of his home state, he found a willing ally.

Steger requested a meeting in 2006, and the governor obliged.

"It was a real heart to heart," he recalls. "I really believed that morally we were on the same level. We saw the moral imperative. And he understood, and back then, he chose to veer in another direction [from his party], which took a lot of guts. I have to respect that."

The two began touring the state together, appearing at a forum in Duluth—where they discussed what global warming would mean for Lake Superior—and the Twin Cities. In interviews, Pawlenty referred to their alliance as the "odd couple," and compared his new partner to Paul Revere, for his role in sounding the alarm on the threat of climate change. He acknowledged that not everyone in his party was happy with his position, but that was the point: He and Steger, he said, were going to "convince the skeptics."

In January 2008, the governor had lunch with Steger at his cabin in Ely, a small town of about 3,500 that serves as a gateway to the remote Boundary Waters wilderness. Joined by Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, they held a community forum that afternoon on climate change, in an area that had long been divided between environmentalists and loggers.

"It was the first time we ever had unity in this community," Steger says. "We were talking about the economy. We were talking about jobs. And we were talking about climate. It was a really amazing time. It really looked like we were going to go somewhere in the state."

That spring, Steger invited Pawlenty to join him on an expedition to the Arctic. The plan was for the governor to meet Steger at Ellesmere Island, a frozen expanse in Canada's far north that has served as a springboard for Arctic expeditions. Steger was launching a major two-month expedition to study the effects of climate change on Ellesmere; Pawlenty would only stay for a few days. Steger had previously brought British billionaire and Virgin Group founder Richard Branson to Baffin Island, and taken future Minnesota governor Mark Dayton along for a trip to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.*

"I wanted to show him the Arctic firsthand," he says. "I wish I could have done that, because when you see that area—it's one thing talking about it and seeing slides and pictures, but when you're there it makes a real impression on your mind. Once you see an area like that, you really almost have to stand up for that."

But after serious discussions, the plan fell through (Steger's expedition continued as scheduled). Part of the problem was just bad timing—the legislative session was finishing up—but there may have been another factor at work: Pawlenty was beginning to make a name for himself as a rising GOP star, and with the presidential election shifting into full gear, the second spot on the ticket seemed like a real possibility.

The governor backed out of the trip and then skipped his final scheduled forum with Steger. Later, he ignored the recommendations produced by the Minnesota Climate Change Advisory Group (of which Steger was a member) that he had convened with much fanfare just a little more than a year earlier. And he began using global warming as a punch line, not a talking point.

Pawlenty's split with Steger—and climate change 180—was striking. When the Republican National Convention came to St. Paul in September 2008, Pawlenty played the role of host to a convention dominated by chants of "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Steger spoke at a protest rally a few blocks away, sharing the stage with the punk-rock group Anti-Flag.

Steger says he has no hard feelings toward Pawlenty, whom he calls "a friend." But they haven't spoken since the Ellesmere expedition, and in an interview with Mother Jones, he used the word "baffled" repeatedly to describe his reaction to the governor's new dogma. (Pawlenty, contacted via his political action committee, did not respond to a request for comment.)

"A lot of environmentalists think I want to dump on the governor because he changed around," Steger says. "No, I respect the governor and I'm thankful that he did what he did do. It's too bad that he couldn't carry the flag, but in that party, you don't carry that flag."

Like Mitt Romney's effort to reform Massachusetts' health care system, Pawlenty's global warming initiative is now anathema to the GOP base. With Steger's support, Pawlenty signed into law a bill that would force the state to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050. But that won't do him much good in the GOP primary: According to a recent survey, only 29 percent of Republicans believe man-made global warming is happening.

"It's misguided; I made the mistake," Pawlenty said on Laura Ingraham's radio show last week, addressing his past support for climate change legislation. "The question is, once you made a mistake, do you recognize it? Do you admit it? Are you willing to come forward? Are you a big enough person to say it was the wrong thing to do?"

Steger, for one, is optimistic that the answer to that question is "yes."

"Who knows? This thing could change—what would five dollars or six dollars a gallon do?" he asks. "On expeditions, I always sought out that edge where you have to be right on guard, where you have to be at your best. That's where the real learning is. We're on the edge right now. We're not being idealists; we're against the wall."

*Correction: This article originally stated that Gov. Dayton's trip occured in 2008.

----

Tim Pawlenty's tenure as governor of Minnesota was largely devoid of the kind of polarizing episodes that give campaign managers migraines. If anything, the knock on the GOP presidential contender seems to be that, with a few exceptions, he's a little too ordinary. One of those exceptions came in 2003, when the newly elected Republican governor selected Cheri Yecke, a little-known Bush administration veteran, to produce new educational standards for what students should—and shouldn't—learn.

The battle that followed put Pawlenty at the center of a culture war conflagration. Members of Yecke's handpicked standards committees dismissed sharing and cooperation as "socialist" ideas, suggested replacing "We Shall Overcome" with "Dixie" in a unit on protest songs, and advocated downplaying the impact of slavery on the nation's antebellum economy—lest it sour students on the virtues of the free market.

</div>

</div>

The resulting outcry was a major factor in Yecke's removal from office by the Democratic-controlled state Senate, and handed Pawlenty one of his biggest political defeats.

As Pawlenty's education commissioner, Yecke's main job was to produce new standards in core subject areas, which could be used to track student performance under the just-passed No Child Left Behind Act. "We need to regain the edge that we have lost as an education innovator," <a href="http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2004/03/27_pugmiret_yeckeconfpre/" target="_blank">Pawlenty explained</a> at the time. "Dr. Yecke is precisely the right person to lead that change."

<div class="pullquote-right">In the meetings, conservatives successfully argued that sharing was an inappropriate concept for kindergartners because of its creeping "socialist" implications.</div>

Pawlenty's pick got off to a rocky start. For one thing, No Child Left Behind faced significant opposition among teachers' unions, which viewed Yecke's proposals as an affront. Yecke, who came to Minnesota from the federal Department of Education, was viewed by opponents as too close to the Bush administration. But the opposition ramped up when Yecke convened a committee to study US and world history standards.

Sara Evans and Lisa Norling, both history professors at the University of Minnesota, were dismayed by the process from the beginning. They began attending committee meetings, which were open to the public, and taking notes on the proceedings. What they heard stunned them.

Yecke formed a committee of educators, parents, politicians, and businessmen, and set them to work drafting the standards. But as Evans and Norling later explained in <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCQQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oah.org%2Fpubs%2Fnl%2F2004nov%2Fpdf%2FNov04-OAH-NL.pdf&rct=j&q=%22Unions%21%20Don%27t%20even%20go%20there%21%22&ei=tbKoTYmECs3QiALPnamXDw&usg=AFQjCNGE92F-O-Qd-wNmbrrqg2Gat_1p2Q&sig2=bEz5AOxypRQs__F6sOIfIQ&cad=rja" target="blank">an article</a> (PDF) they wrote for the Organization of American Historians' newsletter, the meetings seemed overrun by conservative activists, some of whom did not reveal their affiliations. One member, identified simply as a parent and former teacher, was on the board of directors of the conservative Claremont Institute, a right-wing think tank that's been <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/155335/claremont-institute-christine-odonnell-was-taught-abcs-homophobia" target="blank">described</a>—by a supporter—as a "training ground for a lifetime campaign in the trenches of political warfare." (Christine O'Donnell and Andrew Breitbart are both alums.) Private religious academies and homeschoolers were well-represented, even though the standards would have no impact on their curricula.

The resulting circus put Minnesota on the front lines of the culture wars. In the meetings, conservatives successfully argued that sharing was an inappropriate concept for kindergartners because of its creeping "socialist" implications. "In response to another critique noting the absence of organized labor from both the US History and the Economics standards," Evans and Norling noted, "a different committee member sputtered, 'unions! Don't even go there!'"

more

<a href="http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/tim-pawlenty-education-sharing-socialism">http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/tim-pawlenty-education-sharing-socialism</a>

</div>

===

Edward Garvey

President at AESL Consulting

Greater Minneapolis-St. Paul AreaPublic Policy

WeberJohnson Public Affairs, Minnesota Office of Energy Security, Minnesota Public Utilities Commission

Education

University of Saint Thomas - School of Business

366

connectionsConnectSend Edward InMailMore options

Contact Info

www.linkedin.com/pub/edward-garvey/12/532/86a

Background

Summary

Specialties: Knowledge and experience in electric, natural gas, and telecommunications utility regulation and public policy.

Experience

President

AESL Consulting

August 2008 – Present (6 years)

AESL Consulting provides strategic policy and regulatory assistance to utilities, energy and telecommunications companies. AESL stands for Attitude, Effort, Skill & Luck, the attributes of success.

WeberJohnson Public AffairsDirector

WeberJohnson Public Affairs

August 2008 – July 2011 (3 years)

Director

Minnesota Office of Energy Security

January 2003 – August 2008 (5 years 8 months)

Prior to joining WeberJohnson, I was a point person for Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty on energy issues, climate policy and telecommunications. In announcing my resignation on July 15, 2008, Governor Pawlenty said, "Edward has been an exceptional leader on energy issues for a number of years. We particularly appreciate his service as the first director of our new Office of Energy Security. His leadership has been one of the reasons Minnesota is a national leader in energy reform."

As the Director of the Office of Energy Security and Deputy Commissioner of the Dept. of Commerce, I led Governor Pawlenty’s clean energy team producing nation-leading renewable energy policies, implementing one of the nation’s most effective energy efficiency programs, crafting Minnesota’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction plan and encouraging significant transmission, pipeline and other energy infrastructure.

I also helped draft the November 2007 Midwestern Governors Association climate accord and energy platform in and assisted Governor Pawlenty on his Securing a Clean Energy Future Initiative as chair of the National Governors Association.

The Office of Energy Security has 80+ dedicated technical and professional staff that advocates before the MN Public Utility Commission, analyzes rate cases, power purchase agreements, and requests for new electricity generating facilities, transmission lines and pipelines. Minnesota’s energy information office, and Minnesota’s low-income energy assistance program are part of the Office of Energy Security.

As Deputy Commissioner, I also oversaw the Minnesota's telecommunications regulatory and policy development.

Chairman & Commissioner

Minnesota Public Utilities Commission

February 1997 – October 2002 (5 years 9 months)

Director

Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance

January 1995 – February 1997 (2 years 2 months)

Gray Plant MootyLawyer

Gray Plant Mooty

December 1990 – September 1993 (2 years 10 months)

Energy & Environment Legislative Assistant

US Senator Dave Durenberger

May 1987 – November 1990 (3 years 7 months)

Edward served as legislative assistant for energy and the environment for former US Senator Dave Durenberger in Washington DC (5/87-11/90). After three years at the Minneapolis law firm Gray, Plant Mooty (12/90-9/93), Edward went back to work for Sen. Durenberger in his Minnesota office to handle health care issues (9/93-12/94).

===