Closing Argument: Before You Vote, Know the Play Card

By Carol Becker

Editors Note: Carol Becker is a Data Researcher, Political Consultant, and previously served on the Minneapolis Board of Estimate and Taxation.

Minneapolis is going to have an election November 7^th.

It is a hackneyed cliché to say this is the most important election ever. Honestly, you can’t really know until years later whether an election was revolutionary. What I can say is that  Minneapolis is a deeply divided city, with two dueling agendas. And this election will determine which way the City will go over the next two years and shape the full citywide election in 2025.  And it is projected that only 25% of the people eligible to vote will even bother to vote.

What are the two agendas? We can think of the two groups as far-left and center-left on the political spectrum. A good example of this split is siting the replacement Third Precinct.  The moderates, focused on the practicalities of running a city, wants to build a new police precinct to provide a physical place for City employees to do work. The Mayor most recently proposed 2633 Minnehaha Avenue, a site that could be ready in a year for a modest $14M, the cheapest and fastest of any alternative. Voting in favor on Tuesday were Council Members Andrea Jenkins, Michael Rainville, Linea Palmisano, LaTrisha Vetaw, Lisa Goodman and Emily Koski.

The far-left, with its roots in the defund movement, wants to build a “public safety center” with the police only one of many departments in the building.  Or even perhaps a larger “community services center” similar to the service centers that the County has built. They don’t really know exactly, and as Council Member Payne said on Tuesday, they don’t really feel any urgency to come to a resolution. According to Payne, they would rather “engage the public” and “build trust” by “continuing discussions with the community” than expedite a building. But for people who went to the actual meetings about where to site the precinct, they know that activists disrupted every meeting, making real community dialogue impossible. In many ways, it feels like delay just to relitigate the 2021 charter vote. Voting against the proposal were Council Members Elliott Payne, Robin Wonsley, Jeremiah Ellison, Jason Chavez, Aisha Chughtai, and Jamal Osman.

This is just a microcosm of the gulf dividing our city. In the next two years, we are going to face questions like:

• Will we hire more than the absolute minimum number of police officers?
• Will we allow homeless encampments?
• Will we continue to add bike lanes while throttling access to jobs and businesses?
• Will we have rent control?
• Will we spend $40M a year (roughly a 10% increase in taxes) to have the City shovel sidewalks?
• Will we focus on building jobs and growing the economy or will we focus only on worker’s rights?
• Will we focus on the needs of families and children or continue to develop a city that works best for the young and childless?

I could go on.

There are three major endorsements on the progressive side, the Democratic Socialists of America, Take Action Minnesota, and the far-left progressive PAC, Minneapolis for the Many. There are two major endorsements on the center-left side, the moderate PACs All of Minneapolis and Engage Minneapolis.

The DFL used to be a center-left/moderate party. In Minneapolis, that is no longer true. Five far-left candidates and four moderate candidates have been endorsed by the Minneapolis DFL. So it is no longer clear if the DFL is a center-left party any longer.

The Star Tribune has also made endorsements.  None of them were progressives.

The play card for the upcoming election looks like this:

I don’t know if this will be the most important election ever. I can tell you whether our city thrives or declines will depend on who we elect. The turnout is supposed to be small so every vote will matter. Regardless of your views, please vote November 7^th.

https://vote.minneapolismn.gov/voters/where-to-vote/

Commentary: Democratic Socialists Takeover Minneapolis DFL Party

By Carol Becker

Bernie Sanders ran for President in 2016. Sanders identifies as a democratic socialist, not a democrat, and proposed a “a revolution” of democratic socialists taking over the Democratic Party. 

What is a democratic socialism? The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) started in 1982 from groups that split from the Socialist Party of America. The DSA defines its agenda as:  

“Capitalism is a system designed by the owning class to exploit the rest of us for their own profit. We must replace it with democratic socialism, a system where ordinary people have a real voice in our workplaces, neighborhoods, and society…We want a democracy that creates space for us all to flourish not just survive and answers the fundamental questions of our lives with the input of all. We want to collectively own the key economic drivers that dominate our lives, such as energy production and transportation. We want the multiracial working class united in solidarity instead of divided by fear. We want to win “radical” reforms like single-payer Medicare for All, defunding the police/refunding communities, the Green New Deal, and more as a transition to a freer, more just life.

On June 4th, 2016, Bernie Sanders lost the Democratic nomination to Hillary Clinton. Rather than concede, twelve days later, Sanders gave a call to action to his followers. He told them that “the Revolution” would not be won from the top down as he had hoped, but from the bottom up. “We need to start engaging at the local and state level in an unprecedented way… we need … to start running for school boards, city councils, county commissions, state legislatures and governorships.” In the next two weeks, over 7,000 people signed up for kits on how to run for elected office. 

The Sanders campaign was also revolutionary because it was the first campaign on the left to truly organize through social media. Before the rise of social media, in a single party system like Minneapolis, if you were politically active, all went to the same party events, same fundraisers, sat on the same committees. When you decided to run for office, people knew you and would get behind you to help you get elected. You might fight like cats and dogs over a specific issue, then go out for a beer afterwards because you were one big , albeit somewhat dysfunctional family.  Social media changed all this. The deep ties built through attending DFL events could be supplanted by posts and tweets and people following you.  They didn’t even need to meet you to support you. This was transformational to politics.

When Sanders ended his campaign, the Sanders online campaign machinery in Minneapolis turned inward to elect local candidates. In 2017, Our Revolution Twin Cities, which emerged from the Sanders campaign, endorsed 14 candidates for City Council. Three were incumbents who had previously been endorsed by the DFL and 11 were outsiders to the traditional Democratic Party. Using the online tools and relationships built during the Sanders campaign, nine candidates endorsed by Our Revolution got elected to the City Council, delivering Lisa Bender the Council Presidency in 2018.

Social media makes money by having people on their platforms. Human beings respond more to anger and outrage than kindness and happy stories so social media promotes anger and outrage. The more divisive posters are, the more people engage with them, and the higher that they rise in people’s feeds. The organizing on social media rapidly created two distinct groups in Minneapolis. On one side was the “progressives” or “far left” mostly organizing through social media. On the other, “moderates” or “center-left,” mostly organized through individual relationships. Personal attacks, harassment, and outrage grew. For people who came to politics where everyone was basically on the same team, this kind of behavior was unthinkable and obscene. For people on social media, it was effective to organize and gain power by attacking your rivals. The personal attacks on social media got so bad that under Council President Lisa Bender, the two sides on the City Council literally would not talk to each other. Discussion between the two sides effectively ended.

By 2021, Amendment 2, the amendment to remove minimum staffing levels for the Police Department, (also known as the “Defund” amendment), worsened the division in the City. Progressives predominantly supported the Amendment. Moderates predominantly opposed it. The campaign was brutal and ugly, with each side seeing the other as uncaring and unwilling to make needed change despite having substantial agreement over almost everything other than the number of police. Ultimately, the amendment was defeated by 56% of the vote, showing that the moderates had a slim majority of City voters.

By 2023, the Sanders campaign has evolved locally into the Twin Cities Democratic Socialists of America or TCDSA. The TCDSA has effectively taken over the Minneapolis DFL, with the chair and several members in leadership positions being DSA members. There appear to have been irregularities at multiple endorsing conventions favoring progressive candidates. Things got to the point where Mike Norton, the vice-chair of the Minneapolis DFL, resigned  in part due to these irregularities. 

A political party exists to move forward an agenda. Four progressives and four moderates have received DFL endorsements in 2023. The question now is what the DFL stands for, given it has endorsed candidates with two very different agendas.  Some of the major differences between the progressive and moderate agendas are:

Police: Progressives want to reduce the number of police, while moderates want to increase the number of police. There is actually broad agreement on many other public safety issues like hiring mental health responders and having outreach teams for the homeless.

Encampments: Progressives want homeless encampments to remain until there is permanent housing for all persons living in encampments. Moderates see most encampments as drug users choosing their addiction over housing and that leaving them increases harm to occupants and crime.

Transportation: Pushed by progressives, Minneapolis adopted a goal of reducing automobile travel by 60% in the next seven years. Progressives want to achieve this through substantially changing roadways to promote walking, biking, and transit. Moderates want a transportation system focused on access to jobs and small business, which means focusing on automobile travel.

Rent Control: Progressives want a hard 3% cap on rent increases. Moderates oppose this, arguing that rent control ultimately drives up the cost of housing.

Municipal Sidewalk Shoveling: Progressives want the City to shovel sidewalks, as part of its walk-bike-transit agenda. Moderates see this as bad for the environment and its $20M price tag too expensive. Currently less than 1% of property owners do not shovel their sidewalks.

Economy: Democratic Socialists focus more on workers and worker rights. Moderates also focus on supporting businesses development – especially small businesses, job growth, and wealth-building.

The differences in agendas came to the forefront again with the recent attacks on Israel. The TCDSA made a statement that some people interpreted as advocating for the elimination of Israel. The Democratic Party has traditionally strongly supported Israel. This clash of agendas again brought forward the question of what does the Democratic Party in Minneapolis stand for? Is it a center-left party or is it a far-left party?  Which set of priorities will prevail? Will Minneapolis become more socialist? And will Sanders vision of democratic socialists taking over the Democratic Party continue?

Ken Martin had scheduled a meeting of the DFL Executive Committee after the DSA statement, purportedly to expel the socialists from the Democratic Party, similar to Hubert Humphrey in the 1940’s. But the meeting was postponed until after the election.

The big question now is which way will Minneapolis go? The election is November 7^th.