DULUTH, Minn. — After millions spent on ads trying to make their points for them, Rep. Rick Nolan and his Republican opponent, Stewart Mills, met on stage for the first time on Tuesday and confirmed what we all knew — from assault weapons to the Affordable Care Act, these two don’t agree on much.
Tuesday’s debate was the only one so far scheduled between the 8th District candidates in the race considered by many to be the most competitive in Minnesota this cycle. As such, both Mills and Nolan were looking to land a knockout blow against each other — Nolan was the aggressor more often than not, though Mills had a go at big chunks of Nolan’s record.
Nolan cast himself as a populist and a champion of the middle class and slammed Mills for pushing high-income tax cuts while opposing a higher minimum wage. He defended the ACA “and the good things it has done,” while hitting Mills for wanting to repeal the law, even its popular provisions.
Mills said Nolan was working to distort his policy proposals, and essentially equated him to a flip-flopper on mining, a key issue in northeastern Minnesota. He filled in more details on a tax plan that has been the focal point of Democrats’ attacks against him, and time and again defended himself against a very feisty Nolan.
Taxes and the minimum wage
From his opening statement, Nolan looked to paint Mills, subtly or not, as an out-of-touch millionaire who would give rich people tax cuts at the expense of the middle class. That’s been a theme of nearly every ad targeting Mills so far this campaign, and it’s based on Mills’ support for what he calls a “flatter, fairer tax code.”
He expanded on that during Tuesday’s debate, saying he wanted a tax code with two lower tax rates and a smattering of deductions for everything from charitable giving to education expenses and mortgage interest. The plan would help the more than 80 percent of 8th District small businesses that file taxes as individuals, he said.
“It has to be flatter, fairer, it has to be budget neutral, and it has to be so simple you can fill it out on the back of a post card and send it in,” he said.
Nolan said that wasn’t the right way to grow jobs, and equated the plan to offering “tax cuts for super-millionaires and billionaires.” He said he supported offering tax incentives targeted at helping businesses expand instead.
On the minimum wage, Nolan offered one of what became increasingly less-veiled references to Mills’ family business, the Fleet Farm retail chain, when he said it would take a minimum wage worker a week to earn what Mills was making on his executive’s salary over the course of the hour and a half debate.
“The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, and the tax policies are exacerbating and accelerating that and in no small part responsible for that,” he said. “Nobody is for penalizing the rich. We just want the rich and the powerful to pay their fair share.”
Nolan defends the ACA
On the Affordable Care Act, Nolan offered a defense of the law, especially the handful of ACA provisions that are proven popular with voters: ending the pre-existing conditions ban, allowing young people to say on their parents’ health plans, lowering costs for women. He asked: “You really oppose those things and want to repeal all of those important advancements?”
Mills argues the ACA had turned the health care economy into a “welfare state,” and that it failed in its goals of increasing access and decreasing costs. He proposed a plan of well-worn Republican health care reform ideas — tort reform, insurance sales across state lines — and said that the free market would take care of costs that way.
Health care “shouldn’t be between the patient, the government, the insurance company and the doctor,” he said. “It should be between the patient and the doctor.”
A terse exchange on guns
One of the testiest exchanges of the day came on gun rights. So far this year, Republicans have tried to portray Nolan as anti-second amendment and emphasized the “F” grade he’s received from the National Rifle Association. Mills accused Nolan of supporting a handgun ban during his first stint in Congress in the 1970s and hit him for supporting a potential assault weapons ban when he returned to the House last year.
“Rep. Nolan has more than earned his failing grade, and in Washington, D.C. I will stand up for your Second Amendment rights,” he said.
Nolan turned the issue back on Mills and, indirectly, Fleet Farm, hypothetically wondering whether Mills — who came to political prominence through an online video defending gun rights at one of his stores — would support expanding background checks for gun purchases.
“Do you really want the right to sell guns and arms to people who are convicted, violent criminals and terrorists, and people who have been found with serious mental illness?” he said. “Do you want the right to sell guns to those people? What do you have against the background checks?”
Mills called that “way over the line” and said the government should more aggressively enforce background check laws already on the books.
Mining
Nolan had to thread a needle of sorts when mining came up. On one hand, he said he agreed with Mills that the PolyMet copper-nickel mine should secure regulatory approval, but on the other — with anti-PolyMet Green Party candidate Ray Sandman sitting next to him — he defended the environmental regulations that Republicans say have delayed that process.
“I submit that we now have the technology, we now have the brain power, all we have to have is the resolve and the will to do it right,” he said. “I submit that we must be compliant with good, sound environmental rules and regulations.”
Mills accused Nolan of vacillating on his support for the project. And either way, he said that after a nine-year long permitting process, it was time to move approve the project.
“PolyMet is amazingly well-thought out, the science, the engineering is there, there’s no reason we shouldn’t go forward with it,” he said.
‘Waves and roller coasters’
After the debate, Nolan admitted that he risked shedding environmentalist votes by supporting PolyMet, but said he’s “comfortable with my position in the middle as someone who supports mining and supports strong environmental standards.”
As for his digs, subtle and not, at Fleet Farm, Nolan said his goal wasn’t to try to make it personal.
“Mills Fleet Farm has been a wonderfully good company, the Mills family is a wonderfully good family, I have no problems with them at all, they’ve been good citizens and they deserve to be recognized as such,” he said. “This is not about Mills Fleet Farm, this about whether or not we’re going to give more tax cuts to super millionaires and super billionaires.”
Mills, as he’s done with the wealth-based attack ads running against him, said he has “nothing to apologize for” when it comes to Fleet Farm, and he said his debate strategy was to stick to his script no matter Nolan’s swipes against him. A rookie candidate fresh off his first-ever political debate, Mills said campaign life was like “waves and roller coasters.”
“You’re up and then you’re down,” he said. “It’s a learning curve, and it’s something that’s very positive being able to advocate for something you believe in.”
Devin Henry can be reached at dhenry@minnpost.com. Follow him on Twitter: @dhenry
Comments (22)
I hope his staff informs Nolan the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with duck hunting before he embarrasses himself again.
Where is your sense of humor, Mr. Swift?
Congressman Nolan was just kidding Mr. Mills. He said that he didn’t need an AK-47 to go duck hunting, but suggested that Mr. Mills might.
Where is Sandman?
In both of his articles about this debate, Devin Henry ignored Green Party candidate Ray Skip Sandman. From a reputable source such as “Minnpost” shouldn’t one be able to expect objective and unbiased reporting?
Have you been reading Minnpost?
It does not claim to provide objective and unbiased reporting.
Sandman
I can’t believe that Sandman was not mentioned in this article. Even the Duluth news station covered him. This lack of mention is a great disservice to the citizens of the 8th district. By ignoring the validity of 3rd party candidates and their positions, the media keeps us locked in two dimensional politics, with no hope of new, innovative solutions, and no way to change political rhetoric and game-playing.
Sandman was interesting
Greens don’t get the same level of respect as other parties.
When they do not get to be heard, it reinforces the “kook” label.
I didn’t see the entire debate, scrubbing through some of the video.
What I did see of Sandman was worth a listen, same as Mz Nicollet in the gubernatorial debate.
Yep !
Sandman and Nolan should have been covered and Mills ignored! Abd again I ask is there a Fleet Farm on the range?
Sandman And Minn Post
Skip Sandman is the only real credible candidate who has not been bought out in this Congressional race. the fact that Minn Post does it’s very best to pretend he was not there does nothing but discredit Minn Post even further. Or could it just Minn post is showing its political and racial bigotry? Could it be that Minn Post just doesn’t believe than an Ndn just can’t do as well as their white man favorite, Rick Nolan?
Minn post is just a tired DFL establishment hack media. They have the same credibility as FOX News or MSNBC.
Skip may win this race. there are factors that a tired sold out DFL corporatist hack like the writer of this article may not have even considered. Rock on Skip. Thank you for giving some of us hope. Not the Wall Street funded Madison ave inspired Hopey-Changey of Obama and company but REAL HOPE for REAL CHANGE
…and then again,
with Sandman so inefficiently covered by the reporter for whatever reasons, it only agitates the reader to know more of his progressive ideas. May he be heard more often as the result of this bad, bad coverage when we so desperately need a third candidate when one is barely functioning or credible with such naive positions?
And as that old philosopher John Stewart Mill once said…”Although not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative”
We need a third voice to give the people two viable candidates and Sandman deserves fair coverage
That would be John Stuart Mills …..
I like the quote. Actually that John Stuart Mills was brilliant and could change his mind.
I cringe every time I read Stewart Mills and think of what a poor name sake he would be for the original John Stuart Mills.
mispelling…
Thank you indeed for the correction…my apology.
Correction to correction
That would be John Stuart Mill. Probably not an ancestor to someone named Mills but you never know.
All you lefties bemoaning the shunning of Skip Sandman forget that Minnpost is a de jure arm of the Democratic party. The Green Party is poison to the DFL in the same way the IP has been to the GOP. Mark Dayton would be tending daisies today if Tom Horner hadn’t been on the ballot, which is why he’s encouraging the continued inclusion of Hannah Nicollet.
Sandman is a potential liability to Nolan’s re-election, and no blue-blooded media source is going to give him an inch of traction.
Conservatives rarely take responsibility for their losses.
Had Mr. Emmer learned to tone down his rhetoric (as he’s currently doing in the 6th District race) he might have been governor.
I’m Still Looking
For one of those $100K per year bartender gigs Emmer talked about. I suppose Dayton chased all of those jobs to So Dak too.
Rarely?
That implies that it has happened. When? It’s always the fault of the liberal media, voter fraud, or the Trilateral Commission. Never has it been the fault of an unpopular message or a bad candidate (remember the finger pointing in 1990, when the Boschwitz team blamed the Grunseth campaign, who blamed the Boschwitz team?).
Mais Monsieur Swift
Why do you always bring up the Horner/Dayton connection but never the Peter Hutchenson/Pawlenty connection?
How many people debated?
It would seem to be basic journalism for the headline to correctly identify who debated. sigh.
Introduction to Journalism 101
I too am disappointed in MinnPost’s limited reporting in failing to give us “who, what, why, where and how” on this debate. In a democracy, all candidates deserve coverage, so that we can make informed decisions as voters.
Mr. Henry’s article gives additional credence to Eric Black’s assertions, in his MinnPost story recently on why the 2 major parties dominate the political system, that lack of media coverage plays into this dominance. Sadly, MinnPost is an example of this media bias.
Possibly the Kramers could introduce Mr. Black to Mr. Henry, and they could all agree that MinnPost owes it to its readers to cover the full spectrum of political thought?
As to what is in this article as opposed to what is not…
I am curious how the NRA grades candidates. Do they give only A’s and F’s? I wonder what gives you an F? – supporting the need for background checks? Or closing the any background check loopholes around private sale of guns? Or placing any restrictions on clip size?
For the 2nd amendment people out there, I also wonder if there is any limitation on arms that you would support. Should individuals own rocket propelled grenades or rockets capable of downing helicopters? Since Mr Swift confirms that the 2nd amendment is not about duck hunting, but is for personal and community protection against criminals and tyrannical government, it seems that this crowd would want to be armed more similarly to ISIS than Elmer Fudd.
I wonder if any individuals owned cannons in pre- or post revolutionary days?
An article exploring all of these candidate grading systems would be very interesting – from the NRA to the NEA.
Sorry to be a wet blanket
but Sandman has about 6% of the vote. There’s more of a chance that everyone commenting will be struck by lightning while being eaten by a shark than he has of even being competitive, much less win it. We’re weeks away from an important election and with all due respect to Mr. Sandman as a person, his candidacy is irrelevant at this point.
The lack of coverage of Skip Sandman does not surprise me
I cannot vote in that particular race, since I live in Minneapolis, but I have some thoughts about third parties.
Unlike countries where they assassinate or “disappear” political figures who rock the boat, the U.S. media ignore or ridicule candidates who are not standard-issue D’s or R’s.
I first noticed this when I worked on the campaign of Dennis Kucinich for the Democratic nomination in 2004. We had to beg local media for coverage of his appearances, even though he was drawing larger crowds on each visit and ended up with 17% of the caucus vote in Minnesota.
Since then, I have noticed that this is standard treatment for non-Establishment candidates, whether in state or national races. If they are mentioned in the mainstream media at all, it is to ridicule them. Their own parties undermine and disrespect them.
“He can’t win” is not a valid argument for not covering a candidate. Perhaps if a candidate runs enough times, either he or his ideas can make it into the mainstream. Perhaps the candidate’s showing can point to vital concerns that the major parties are ignoring. Greens have won local races, especially on the West Coast. (That being said, I’m not crazy about the local Green Party, which seems to contain some very un-green people.)
There was a legislative district in the suburbs of Portland that was considered to be so thoroughly Republican that the Democrats didn’t even bother to field a candidate. I knew people who lived there who were not Republicans, and they were frustrated with the state Democrats for not giving them anyone to vote for. Into the vacuum came a Socialist (a real one, a member of the Socialist Party, USA). He ran in the district and took 20% of the vote. The Democrats sat up and realized that maybe their notion of that district being solidly Republican was out of date, so they ran a candidate. They lost that time, and they lost the next time, although by a narrower margin. The third time, their candidate won. But it took a Socialist to shake them out of their misconception.
Whenever I meet a person who proclaims that he or she will not vote because neither the D nor the R candidate is worthy, I urge that person to vote third party. The reason is that even though turnout in the U.S. is low, whichever party receives the votes of the voting minority claims a landslide and a mandate. Non-voters, whether they abstain out of laziness or out of principle, literally do not count at all. Voting third party is a way to protest against the low quality of candidates that the D’s and R’s have presented and the only way to have that protest count.