Digesting Dan Wolgamott's BS is difficult

A loyal reader of this blog sent me Dan Wolgamott's statement after Monday's recount. It said "I’m satisfied that the results of this recount confirm what the voters decided on November 5th: once again, they’ve hired me to get things done for St. Cloud at the Capitol. Serving our community in the Minnesota House is the honor of a lifetime, and I am excited to be re-elected to another term. This victory was possible thanks to the hard work of a broad coalition of St. Cloud residents, and I’m grateful for all the support. Now is the time to foster relationships beyond partisan divides to tackle the challenges facing Minnesota’s families. I look forward to working with my seatmate, Rep. Bernie Perryman, and my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to deliver results for St. Cloud."

That's a pile of BS. Did Dan Wolgamott work with Bernie Perryman when he voted to repeal Minnesota's version of the Born-Alive Infant Protection Act? A: No, he didn't. He didn't care what anyone thought outside of Speaker Hortman. That's who he paid attention to, not his St. Cloud constituents.

On controversial vote after controversial vote, Dan Wolgamott ignored his St. Cloud constituents and sided with Speaker Hortman. St. Cloud isn't into electric vehicles or green energy. I've lived here all my life. The blackout bill was one of the first controversial bills passed in 2023. According to the article, "With the signing of the bill, Minnesota utilities are now obligated to transition to 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040 to step up the fight against climate change." Gov. Walz is quoted as saying this:

What this bill does and makes it very clear that no longer is this debate about moving towards clean energy future on sustainability of the planet and our economic future are no longer divided, they run hand in hand.

Actually, this bill will get clobbered the minute the federal lawsuit is filed. North Dakota sells energy to Minnesota. It has different environmental requirements. The differences can't be settled by Minnesota or ND. They must be settled by Congress because, in this instance, the sale of electricity is a transaction between states. That automatically invokes the Interstate Commerce Clause. That makes it a federal, not a state, issue.

The more important issue is whether it's good public policy. As I wrote yesterday, Holman Jenkins settled that issue:

The faulty assumption here is that phasing out fossil energy will be any easier in 50 years when the world is consuming twice as much energy and half is still fossil energy, producing the same emissions as today. A likelier outcome: When the green subsidies stop, as inevitably they must, the result will be a burst of emissions as the formerly subsidized users shift to fossil energy to stay solvent.

Dan Wolgamott is a typical politician. He insists that he works with his seatmate in the legislature. There's no proof of that in the last 2 years. Wolgamott's votes reflected the votes of a Twin Cities politician, not the votes of a St. Cloud representative. Listen to the competing statements from Senate Majority Leader Kari Dziedzic and Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson on the Blackout Bill:

Most St. Cloudites watch their pennies closely. Voting for a bill that makes St. Cloud's electric bills more expensive isn't the vote of a true St. Cloud resident. It's the vote of a Hortman yes man who gets his orders, salutes, then says 'Yes Mam.'