Minnesota's Split
Personality
By Craig Grau, associate professor of political science, University
of Minnesota at Duluth
 |
During the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, Minnesota was viewed as a state that produced Democratic national leaders. That image changed in the 1990s to one of a state with a decidedly split political personality. While many states were divided between the two major parties, Minnesota was politically split three ways.
The image of Minnesota as a politically Democratic state comes from the six Presidential elections from 1964-1984 when the Democratic ticket contained a Minnesotan (Hubert Humphrey or Walter Mondale) five times. By the 1990s, Bill Clinton was still carrying Minnesota for the Democrats, but only slightly better than his national average. Not as noticed was that Ross Perot was receiving an even higher percentage of Minnesota votes in comparison to his national average.
In 1998, Jesse Ventura, best known as a former professional wrestler, won the Minnesota governorship as a Reform party candidate in a huge voter turnout. This was clearly a surprise, but third partyism and independence have strong roots in Minnesota. The party known as the Democratic party nationally is officially the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party in Minnesota. It was a merger of the Democrat and Farmer-Labor parties following World War II. The Republicans realized the popularity of independence in Minnesota in the mid-1970s and officially changed its name to the Independent-Republican party. They dropped the word Independent in the mid-1990s when Republicanism was clearly sweeping the nation.
In addition to making their choice for president in 2000, Minnesotans will be electing a U.S. Senator, eight members of the United States House of Representative and all of the state legislators (67 state senators and 134 members of the state house of representatives). Ballot measures including state constitutional amendments may also appear.
Incumbent U.S. Senator Rod Grams, a conservative Republican, is seeking reelection. Since the 1978 election after the departures of Humphrey and Mondale, Republicans have held the U.S. Senate seats 80 percent of the time. The only Democrat has been Paul Wellstone, who is at least as liberal as Grams is conservative. IN the U.S. House, however, the Democrats hold a six-to-two advantage and all incumbents seem to be running for reelection.
The Democrats seem to have been disheartened by their defeats in 1998. None of the candidates endorsed at the state Democratic convention won statewide office and the primary winner for governor, Hubert (Skip) Humphrey, came in third in the governor's race. They maintained control of the state senate, but it was not up for election. Although Grams seems vulnerable, no Democratic candidate with clear statewide appeal has surfaced so far, although a number of aspirants have entered the race. Former congressman Tim Penny may yet enter, but is not inspiring to some liberal activists. For those looking for a change, Bill Bradley's presidential bid seems appealing.
The 1998 results were less disheartening for Republicans. They picked up the Minnesota house of representatives and the office of Secretary of State. Their candidate only narrowly lost the governorship and Senator Rod Grams seems less vulnerable now than a year ago. Although an interest in winning the Presidency is strong, social conservatives who have been among the major activists in the last decade may not be invigorated with the leading choices.
For the Reform party, the Ventura victory was thrilling, but clouds have appeared on the horizon. Ideologically, the Minnesota Reform party has not taken a stand on social issues and views itself as middle of the road. The leadership was not happy with Ross Perot's 1996 presidential bid and he was not very supportive of them in 1998. What they will do in 2000 will affect the Reform party not only in Minnesota, but nationally. The party has not followed up the Ventura victory with any winning legislative candidates in special elections and their hope to lure Tim Penny to be their U.S. Senate candidate seems to have failed. With Ventura in as governor, though, they may still have some control over their destiny.
There is a possibility (not yet a probability) that the most interesting choice for Minnesotans in November may be whether or not to create a one-house state legislature. In the past, advocates have included governors and some legislative leaders, but Governor Ventura has decided to make it a "legacy issue". A state constitutional amendment is required and, in Minnesota, that means consent from the very legislature that would be altered. Cynics are quick to point out that the legislators will not vote themselves out of a job and, indeed, no state legislature has placed such a proposal on a ballot for a decision by the electorate. (Nebraska became one house in 1934 through a direct initiative by the voters.) The issue will be joined early this year. Republican Minnesota house speaker Steve Sviggum is siding with the governor, while Democratic Senate majority leader Roger Moe is opposed. On the first step, whether to place the measure on the ballot, it would seem that the governor can't lose. If the legislators vote to put it on the ballot, he will get the credit for a political miracle. If not, he can portray their action as "politics as usual" -- the mood that shook Minnesota and captivated the country.
