Beard survives shocking challenge for GOP endorsement
In a surprisingly strong challenge centered on Beard's bill to change the state's judicial election system, challenger Bruce Mackenthun of Louisville Township commanded an early lead in balloting and took Beard through 12 rounds of voting before conceding to spare the party a primary battle.
Hungry GOP delegates met for 41/2 more hours in a humid school cafeteria after endorsing Prior Lake-School Board Member Eric Pratt on the first ballot for retiring Sen. Claire Robling's seat.
Pratt was opposed by Prior Lake business consultant John Myser, who also made a run for state representative in the new House District 55B, but lost on the second ballot to Spring Lake Township financial advisor Tony Albright.
Before Robling announced her retirement from the state Senate on Friday morning, it was to be a three-way contest for the House 55B seat. Pratt, Myser and Albright previously announced for that race.
On Saturday, the contest was expected to be for 55B and Senate 55, not the new 55A, where five-term Beard was opposed by the lesser known Mackenthun to represent most of Shakopee and Jackson and Louisville townships.
In fact, not enough delegates and alternates even showed up to fill half the delegate slots in 55A.
This obviously worked to the advantage of Mackenthun, who aggressively lobbied delegates in advance of Saturday's convention and got his supporters out, clearly blindsiding Beard.
Mackenthun, who said he felt called to run for office, told the Valley News that judicial elections was one of his main issues when contacting delegates and it was the one issue he asked Beard about when he informed Beard he planned to challenge him.
Mackenthun supports the direct election of judges, while Beard has authored legislation to move the state to a hybrid system of appointment, with retention elections. (Currently, most judges are initially appointed anyway since many purposely resign mid-term.)
Mackenthun led on the first ballot Saturday, falling only four votes short of the 60 percent threshold needed for endorsement, and he continued to lead through the sixth ballot.
It appears delegate minds were swayed by additional speeches and question-and-answer sessions between ballots.
After a tie in the 11th round, an intense discussion on judicial elections ensued. The tide shifted to Beard on the 12th ballot, 23-19 (with five blank votes), but it wasn't enough for him to secure endorsement.
Rather than face the prospect of no endorsement, Mackenthun conceded after losing two votes to Beard in the final round.
'I felt it was important for the party to have an endorsed candidate,' said Mackenthun, who also differed with Beard on the racino issue.
Mackenthun, who made a previous run for an open seat in his old House district, said he felt a calling to run for state representative in 55A and he also believed a contested race would produce a better candidate.
'Politics is a contest of ideas,' Beard pronounced to delegates upon receiving the GOP nod by acclamation, calling the intense discussion a 'good give-and-take.'
However, Beard was not happy that one-time Republican Minnesota Supreme Court candidate Greg Wersal, who distributed literature at the convention, inserted himself into the affair.
The media was not permitted to listen to speeches or question-and-answers during the convention because bystanders were removed after one observer shouted at Mackenthun. Even state Rep. Mark Buesgens, R-Savage, wasn't allowed in to make a speech for Beard.
Delegates said the sticking point for many was Beard's stance on judicial appointments. He defended his bill, which he reportedly told delegates was still a work-in-progress and would evolve through the committee process. After the convention, Beard told a reporter he doesn't plan to move the legislation forward until consensus is reached.
Under the current legislation, judges would initially be appointed by the governor. After a judge's first term in office, voters would decide whether he or she should be retained. Vacancies would be filled from a list of candidates nominated by a merit selection commission.
Kent Neff, a Mackenthun backer, told a reporter that delegates were concerned about losing their voice in judicial elections, and that there were a lot of good questions and helpful discussion on the topic.
Beard, a key player in the Republican-controlled House, was expected to be a shoe-in for the endorsement against Mackenthun, a Louisville Township handyman who hasn't held office before.
But Mackenthun worked hard, knocking on doors and calling all the delegates in advance of the convention. He was particularly buoyed by the judicial election issue, which surprised many to be such a hot topic.
'Delegates did what they're supposed to do – vetting and getting to know the candidates,' said Beard, who met with Mackenthun and others at a restaurant following the convention. Beard pointed out the 55A delegation included Louisville and Jackson townships, which weren't in his district before.
Beard said Mackenthun was highly organized, while a lot of his own supporters stayed home Saturday. He praised Mackenthun 'for doing the classy thing' by bowing out to avoid a primary battle.
Mackenthun said many of his own supporters were unable to make the convention.
After his endorsement, Beard gathered with Pratt and Albright, the other endorsed candidates, and Republican delegates for photo to show GOP unity.
Beard is expected to have the toughest fight of the three for election, considering district demographics and that he is the only one with a DFL opponent, former Shakopee School Board member and Riverside Computers owner Chuck Berg.
With Robling out of the Senate race, however, it seems more plausible that a DFL candidate could arise to challenge Pratt, a U. S. Bank vice president from Prior Lake.
It's expected that Albright, a former Scott County commissioner candidate, will have a slam-drunk run for state representative in 55B, which is predominately Republican. A previous DFL candidate bowed out of this race after redistricting results were announced.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
26 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Texas Capitol evacuated after shooting threat citing ‘political situation'
The Texas Capitol was evacuated late Tuesday in response to a shooting threat that forced people — including those protesting a Republican order for police to escort Democratic lawmakers to their homes — to leave the building.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
As Democrats wage national redistricting war, Republicans may have the upper hand
WASHINGTON — As California legislators begin the process of reconfiguring its congressional districts and creating a more Democratic-friendly map in next year's midterms, the party could be pushing itself into a national redistricting war — and one that would likely hold them at a disadvantage. The California Legislature will work to pass its proposed version of the state's congressional map this week, which would give Democrats an advantage in five additional House seats in the state. After that, the revised map will be on the ballot in November when California voters participate in a special election for municipal races. That means Democrats' attempt to thwart Republican redistricting efforts in other states, namely Texas, where President Donald Trump is pushing for Republicans to draw more GOP-friendly districts, will come down to whether California leaders can convince enough voters to support the gambit. And that may be easier said than done. Even if California is successful and counteracts the five seats Republicans say they'll flip in the Lone Star State, it could ignite efforts in other states to redraw their maps for partisan leverage. Doing so would be an easier fight for Republican-led states than those led by Democrats, largely because of the laws put in place by party leaders to avoid this exact situation. Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans in redrawing maps As state leaders threaten a redraw of their maps, Republicans have an advantage over their Democratic counterparts due to local laws impeding partisan gerrymandering attempts. Most redistricting efforts are completed through state legislatures and more easily accomplished in states with single-party control, meaning one party controls both chambers of the state legislature and the governor's mansion. In that category, Republicans have the trifecta advantage: There are 26 states under complete GOP control compared to just 15 under complete Democratic control. Once you factor out the states that don't have split congressional representation — for example, Utah, which only has Republican seats so a map redraw wouldn't do anything to change the calculus — you are down to 15 red states and eight blue states with seats available to flip. Even then, at least four of those Democratic-led states require independent commissions (or some hybrid system with state legislators) to change congressional maps in the middle of the decade. That complicates their efforts while the Republican states would only require their legislatures to do the heavy lifting. 'Even if (Democrats) are hell bent on doing this, I don't think it's going to be a very easy thing for them to do as a matter of their various state laws,' John Malcom, the vice president of the conservative Heritage Foundation's Institute for Constitutional Government, told the Deseret News in an interview. 'It's not going to be easy for them to do, and they have less room to maneuver because they've already done a remarkably effective job of redistricting (some states) in a way that … dilutes Republican votes.' California gambles with those obstacles in place Unlike a majority of states, California hands the power of map-drawing not to state legislators but instead to an independent redistricting commission that is meant to draw nonpartisan boundaries based purely on population data. The commission was first enacted in 2010 and is made up of five Republicans, five Democrats and four voters who are not affiliated with either of the major parties. California is mandated by its state constitution to utilize the commission only once a decade, and it already did so in 2021. In order to work around this, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced last week he would introduce a constitutional amendment circumventing those laws. The catch: California voters, who largely support the independent commission, have to approve throwing away the panel's nonpartisan maps until after the census is taken again in 2030 and new maps are drawn for the 2032 election cycle. A recent Politico/Citrin Center/Possibility Lab survey found 64% of voters support keeping the independent commission, compared to just 36% who said state lawmakers should draw the maps. But some members of the commission who drew the current boundaries support throwing out the map, with the agreement that the panel will be reinstated later. But even with that endorsement, Republicans plan to fight back with accusations that Democrats are defying the will of the voters. 'I think that it will be seen as a negatively partisan thing if they try to go back on what the voters only recently approved,' Malcolm told the Deseret News. 'But you know, Gavin Newsom is making it very clear that the lane he wants to run for president in is the 'I'm the anti-Trump guy.' And so being nakedly partisan is not something that Gavin Newsom is going to shy away from.' Still, Democrats could have some luck as nearly half of the state's voters belong to the party compared to just 24.7% who are registered Republicans, according to the Public Policy Institute of California. Another 21.9% identify as independents. California and Texas could set off firestorm in other states With Texas expected to approve its new map as early as this week and California moving full steam ahead on its proposal this fall, the boundary battle could elevate to an all-out war encompassing several states across the country. More than half a dozen states are publicly considering changes to their congressional maps next November in an attempt to gain leverage — especially as it becomes likely California will simply neutralize Texas and neither party will benefit. Democrats in New York have openly suggested they would look at ways to change congressional maps to squeeze out GOP lawmakers in vulnerable districts while Florida Republicans are considering the opposite in the Sunshine State. But other states are slowly entering the conversation, such as Indiana, where Republicans already hold a 7-2 advantage to Democrats. All seven of those House Republicans came out in support of redrawing the map on Monday after President Donald Trump began looking to the state as another opportunity to secure his majority. 'Now, with President Trump and the entire Hoosier Republican Congressional delegation expressing support for Congressional redistricting, the General Assembly should act swiftly to get the job done,' Rep. Marlin Stutzman, the first Indiana Republican to announce his support, said in a statement to the Deseret News. 'Hoosiers deserve Congressional districts that ensure voting records are reflected accurately in their Congressional districts.' Despite uphill battle, Democrats say they can't give up Although Democrats face more obstacles than Republicans, the redistricting battle is emerging as a war they must wage, strategists say — lest they risk an unenthusiastic base that has already expressed frustration the minority doesn't do enough to thwart Trump's agenda. 'The way I look at it, you have to fight fire with fire,' Brad Bannon, a Democratic strategist based in Washington, D.C., told the Deseret News. 'You just can't let the Republicans gerrymander their way to a House majority that they're going to have difficulty protecting.' Republicans currently hold a 219-212 majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, a historically slim margin that has often made it difficult for the party to advance legislation even with a Republican trifecta. With control of the White House and Senate, Republicans have enjoyed total control of Washington — something that is at risk next November. Historical trends show that the party of the sitting president typically loses control of the House during midterm elections. If Democrats manage to flip the House, it would deal a massive blow to Trump and likely thwart his agenda for his final two years. As a result, Trump is pressing state Republican leaders to deliver additional seats through redistricting — which some strategists say is a sign of political desperation and should motivate Democrats not to let up. 'Democrats have an opportunity to take back the House, and it won't stop the abuses in the Trump regime, but it will slow them down,' Bannon said. 'Democrats will have the opportunity to call hearings and investigations into the Trump administration, and I don't think we can afford to let that opportunity go by. So I think Democrats should go full steam ahead.'
San Francisco Chronicle
3 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
9/11 victims' fund architect slams changes to New Hampshire abuse settlement program
CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — An attorney who helped design and implement the 9/11 victims' compensation fund says New Hampshire lawmakers have eroded the fairness of a settlement program for those who were abused at the state's youth detention center. Deborah Greenspan, who served as deputy special master of the fund created after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, recently submitted an affidavit in a class-action lawsuit seeking to block changes to New Hampshire's out-of-court settlement fund for abuse victims. She's among those expected to testify Wednesday at a hearing on the state's request to dismiss the case and other matters. More than 1,300 people have sued the state since 2020 alleging that they were physically or sexually abused as children while in state custody, mostly at the Sununu Youth Services Center in Manchester. Most of them put their lawsuits on hold after lawmakers created a settlement fund in 2022 that was pitched as a 'victim-centered' and 'trauma-informed' alternative to litigation run by a neutral administrator appointed by the state Supreme Court. But the Republican-led Legislature changed that process through last-minute additions to the state budget Gov. Kelly Ayotte signed in June. The amended law gives the governor authority to hire and fire the fund's administrator and gives the attorney general — also a political appointee — veto power over settlement awards. That stands in stark contrast to other victim compensation funds, said Greenspan, who currently serves as a court-appointed special master for lawsuits related to lead-tainted water in Flint, Michigan. She said it 'strains credulity' to believe that anyone would file a claim knowing that 'the persons ultimately deciding the claim were those responsible for the claimant's injuries.' 'Such a construct would go beyond the appearance of impropriety and create a clear conflict of interest, undermining the fairness and legitimacy of the settlement process," she wrote. Ayotte and Attorney General John Formella responded by asking a judge to bar Greenspan's testimony, saying she offered 'policy preferences masquerading as expert opinions' without explaining the principles beyond her conclusions. 'Her affidavit is instead a series of non sequiturs that move from her experience to her conclusions without any of the necessary connective tissue,' they wrote. The defendants argue that the law still requires the administrator to be 'an independent, neutral attorney' and point out that the same appointment process is used for the state's judges. They said giving the attorney general the authority to accept or reject settlements is necessary to give the public a voice and ensure that the responsibility for spending millions of dollars in public funds rests with the executive branch. As of June 30, nearly 2,000 people had filed claims with the settlement fund, which caps payouts at $2.5 million. A total of 386 had been settled, with an average award of $545,000. One of the claimants says he was awarded $1.5 million award in late July, but the state hasn't finalized it yet, leaving him worried that Formella will veto it. 'I feel like the state has tricked us,' he said in an interview this week. 'We've had the rug pulled right out from underneath us.' The Associated Press does not name those who say they were sexually assaulted unless they come forward publicly. The claimant, now 39, said the two years he spent at the facility as a teenager were the hardest times of his life. 'I lost my childhood. I lost things that I can't get back,' he said. 'I was broken.' Though the settlement process was overwhelming and scary at times, the assistant administrator who heard his case was kind and understanding, he said. That meeting alone was enough to lift a huge burden, he said. 'I was treated with a lot of love,' he said. 'I felt really appreciated as a victim and like I was speaking to somebody who would listen and believe my story.' Separate from the fund, the state has settled two lawsuits by agreeing to pay victims $10 million and $4.5 million. Only one lawsuit has gone to trial, resulting in a $38 million verdict, though the state is trying to slash it to $475,000. The state has also brought criminal charges against former workers, with two convictions and two mistrials so far. The 39-year-old claimant who fears his award offer will be retracted said he doesn't know if he could face testifying at a public trial. 'It's basically allowing the same people who hurt us to hurt us all over again,' he said.
