This coverage is made possible by a grant from The Saint Paul Foundation.

Minneapolis mayoral candidates don’t agree on who’s a true ‘progressive’ — and what that means

MinnPost photo by Corey Anderson

When City Council Member Gary Schiff dropped out of the battle for DFL endorsement for Minneapolis mayor, he asked his supporters to vote for City Council Member Betsy Hodges.

Don Samuels
MinnPost photo by Karen BorosDon Samuels

Schiff described himself as a progressive who admired Hodges’ progressive politics.

Candidate Mark Andrew, a former Hennepin County commissioner, also labels himself a progressive, and he is not alone. Five of the eight candidates for mayor have figured out a definition of progressive that makes the label fit their politics.

Labels and definitions

If being a progressive is the hot deal in this race, we all need to know exactly what it means and how those five candidates — and the other three active ones — define themselves.

Don Samuels, the third City Council member to try running for mayor, avoids labels. And that includes the label of progressive, even though he’s all for making progress.

“I’m not sure what a political progressive is, quite frankly,” said Samuels. “I believe I am motivated by the determination to see progress in our city and especially in the areas where we are most failing.”

Samuels lives in North Minneapolis and chose that area because he sees opportunities there for improvement.

“That’s what I’ve dedicated my life to. That’s why I live in this community, because I believe it’s America’s greatest opportunity community,” said Samuels. “We all make progress when each person is making progress. It’s short-sighted to see the world as otherwise.”

But no labels, please. “I really avoid the labels because you get lumped in with people’s perceptions and prejudices,” he said. “I’d rather be defined by my work, my character, my vision and my results. You have to have results.”

Adds Samuels: “True progressiveness ends up with progress being made, and that is the only test of true progressiveness.”

Dan Cohen, a former City Council member, admires Schiff and even contributed to his campaign. Schiff calls himself a progressive. Cohen is probably not a progressive.

A liberal on steroids?

“I think a progressive, in the politically correct vernacular, would be a liberal on steroids,” said Cohen, who, like Samuels, avoids labels.

“I let other people put labels on me. It’s hard to put a label on yourself,” said Cohen, who says he doesn’t know if he’s a progressive and doesn’t think it’s his job to give himself a political title. “The answer to that question belongs to the electorate, not to me.”

Cam Winton
MinnPost photo by Karen BorosCam Winton

A liberal on steroids does not describe Cam Winton, a Republican who has been a Democrat and is running as an independent. He thinks progressives see big government as the solution to whatever problem they’re trying to solve.

“On the term progressive, I think people use that term when they’re describing themselves as people who see a need for government to keep expanding, for government spending to keep increasing, despite the fact that we’re already squeezed,” said Winton. “When they see a policy goal, their first instinct is to use government, and government alone, to get there. I don’t share that belief.”

Despite that definition of a progressive, Winton has found a way to describe himself as a progressive, but not the kind who turns to government as the ultimate solution.

“If progressive means making progress as a society, where every single person in our society has opportunities, then damn right I’m a progressive,” he said. “A goal may be worthy, but we don’t need City Hall to be involved.”

Bashing former office-holders

Part of the mayoral debate about who is and isn’t a progressive has been focused on government actions of the 1990s. Some say those programs, many of which involved government subsidies, are no longer the solution to the problems of 2013.

It’s become one way to bash anyone who was in office more than a decade ago.

Mark Andrew
MinnPost photo by Karen BorosMark Andrew

One of those people is Mark Andrew, who acknowledges “there’s a little bit of theater” in the debate about who is progressive.

Andrew, who served on the Hennepin County Board in the ’90s, defends his record.

“I created the Midtown Greenway in the 1990s. That has stood the test of time as one of the most brilliant urban redevelopment strategies ever done in Minneapolis,” said Andrew, adding the $25 million investment of public dollars has created $1 billion in economic development. “That was a policy of the 1990s, so the policies of the 1990s must have been pretty effective.”

Despite that past success, Andrew acknowledges that government subsidies have been replaced as a tool for encouraging private development.

“The era of big-government models has passed us by. I think this needs to become an era of innovation,” said Andrew. “To me it’s the smart-government model.”

Better than alternatives?

Still, he hangs on to his progressive label and suggests others might have adopted that title because it seems more comfortable than some of the alternatives.

“Let’s remember that some people call themselves progressive because they are afraid of calling themselves liberals,” said Andrew. “Being a progressive is a badge of honor to me. It represents thoughtful, humane policy with a keen eye focused on the bottom line.”

“Some would say I’m the most progressive candidate in the race, but I’m not having a contest with anyone,” he said.

Actually, he is having a contest with at least seven other people who also want to be mayor.

Betsy Hodges
MinnPost photo by Karen BorosBetsy Hodges

Hodges is one of those candidates — and a critic of the policies that existed when Andrew was on the County Board.

“We don’t need the corporate subsidies. That’s one of the big differentiators here, let’s be honest,” she said. “The ’90s model of opening the pocketbook to give corporate subsidies, picking winners and losers in the private market, that’s not what got our city on firm footing.”

Hodges credits recent immigrants who opened businesses along Lake Street and other small-business owners with being the economic engine that carried Minneapolis through the recession.

“I believe that when we invest in the common good, like transit, like partnerships in education, like having a system that supports small business, that’s the work of government,” she said, noting that she thinks this new model is what is working in the 21st century.

Hodges is not a person who shies away from a fight. For six years, she worked to merge two closed Minneapolis pension funds with the state pension system.

“I was told I was ruining my career. I was told it would never happen,” she said. But it did happen, and it saved Minneapolis taxpayers $20 million in 2012, she said. To Hodges, that battle is proof of her progressive credentials.

“When I think about what a progressive is, it kind of comes down to ‘Are you representing the people or are you representing the powerful?” Hodges said. “I am a progressive who also wants to make sure the budget is balanced.”

The most ‘progressive’ candidate?

Perhaps the most progressive candidate in the race is the schoolteacher who joined the contest to make sure public education is part of the debate. He has plenty to say on topics beyond education.

Jim Thomas
MinnPost photo by Karen BorosJim Thomas

Jim Thomas believes in universal health care, free education all the way through college, living-wage jobs for everyone, affordable child care and affordable housing. He is not a friend to corporate America.

“We cannot have a corporate society where our values are reflected by what is best for corporations, where we outsource our morality to the leaders of corporations,” said Thomas, who thinks that is exactly the current situation in America.

“One of the things I think a progressive society would be is one where corporations are not treated like people,” said Thomas. “Right now, I think the Supreme Court has decided they are, so until that changes, we cannot be a progressive society.”

“I think a progressive is somebody who looks forward seven generations and makes decisions based on that,” said Thomas.

Jackie Cherryhomes, another former City Council member, defines a progressive as “a person who works for social change.” She was part of the anti-war movement when she was in high school and continued to, in her words, “question authority” in college and beyond.

“I was raised in a Quaker household. My family was very politically active, very socially active,” said Cherryhomes. “My father was the absolute definition of progressive.”

Like Andrew, Cherryhomes was in office during the ’90s. She sees part of the debate about being a progressive as a series of litmus tests candidates and their supporters use to measure opponents.

“My whole life has been built around trying to make things better for people, particularly people who might not be at the table,” said Cherryhomes. “I think striving for social justice is never out of date.”

“Progressive is all about putting people first,” said Stephanie Woodruff, the newest candidate in the race. “All people are equal. There shouldn’t be any unemployment; there should be zero poverty. Progressive is more of a principle than politics.”

Jackie Cherryhomes
MinnPost photo by Karen BorosJackie Cherryhomes

Like Samuels and Cohen, Woodruff is not into labels. She sees a progressive as someone moving forward, and she is all for moving forward.

“People should come first, but corporate America and business has a vital part,” said Woodruff, who owns a small software company and works to recruit professionals in finance careers. She knows her businesses are only successful when other businesses are spending money.

“I always want to know “What is the return on investment?” Maybe that’s because I’m an accountant,” said Woodruff, who points out that when businesses are handing out paychecks, workers can buy houses and pay taxes. “I’ve had to live paycheck to paycheck. I want to know the benefit of spending.”

“We need to stop spending and start investing. We need to invest in education options that are going to yield a return 25 years out versus throwing money at quick-fix solutions,” she said.

“If we truly were progressive in our policies in the past, and currently today, then we wouldn’t be facing today [high rates of poverty]. We wouldn’t have the largest achievement gap in America,” Woodruff said.

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (13)

  1. Submitted by Pat Berg on 07/22/2013 - 07:52 am.

    Purity tests

    Let’s hope the Democrats don’t start falling prey to the perceived need to live up to some kind of “purity test” as candidates for office. After all, that approach has been working SO well for Republicans who have tried it (NOT!)

  2. Submitted by Kevin Watterson on 07/22/2013 - 10:07 am.

    I don’t know who will win, but when DFLers fight over who is the most liberal I know who loses.

    • Submitted by Brian Simon on 07/22/2013 - 09:26 pm.

      ranked choice

      With ranked choice voting liberals can fight over whom is most pure while other voters make their own choices. There may be surprises for all…

  3. Submitted by David Greene on 07/22/2013 - 10:30 am.

    Greenway Development?

    Claiming that the Midtown Greenway by itself spurred development is pretty bold, to the point of being laughable.

    Yes, there is tons of development in Uptown, for example. However, it is very hard to demonstrate that that growth would not have happened but for the Greenway. A lot of conditions changed in the area, not just the Greenway.

    I’m not very familiar with development on other parts of the Greenway but claiming the Uptown developments as fruits of the Greenway is absurd.

  4. Submitted by RB Holbrook on 07/22/2013 - 12:38 pm.


    This article shows why the word “progressive” should not be a part of our political discourse. It is a term that has become devoid of any real meaning. Let’s retire it, along with such chestnuts as “moderate,” “pragmatic,” “bipartisan,” and “fiscally responsible.”

  5. Submitted by craig furguson on 07/22/2013 - 01:26 pm.

    Let’s face it, it’s all about the subsidies.

    Hodges on one hand, “The ’90s model of opening the pocketbook to give corporate subsidies, picking winners and losers in the private market, that’s not what got our city on firm footing.”

    Then, “For six years, she worked to merge two closed Minneapolis pension funds with the state pension system. “I was told I was ruining my career. I was told it would never happen,” she said. But it did happen, and it saved Minneapolis taxpayers $20 million in 2012”

    It presumably saved Minneapolis taxpayers by having the state take over the problem they created. No “progressives” here.

  6. Submitted by Dennis Tester on 07/22/2013 - 01:46 pm.

    Jim Thomas

    is obviously the most “progressive.” And I hope he becomes Minneapolis’ new mayor so we can get him out of the classroom.

  7. Submitted by Doug Mann on 07/22/2013 - 02:00 pm.

    Doug Mann of the Green Party is a mayoral candidate

    I am endorsed by the New Progressive Alliance, and support its platform. City Council member Cam Gordon also sought and received the NPA endorsement. Last year I stood for election to the Minneapolis School Board, advanced to the general election and obtained 31,300 votes, about 25% of the total vote, with endorsements from the NPA, the Green Party, Democratic Socialists of America, and Lavender Greens (the LGBTIQ caucus of the Green Party).

    I am fighting for a stadium referendum this fall. On July 16, 2013, I filed a petition for a writ of mandamus with the District Court, seeking an order commanding the City Council to hold a Vikings Stadium referendum. A hearing is scheduled on August 20, 2013, at 8:30 a.m. at the Hennepin County Government Center. Shortly thereafter, I expect a ruling. I intend to give the judge no choice but to rule that the Citizens of Minneapolis have the right to vote on the use of City of Minneapolis tax revenues and other obligations imposed on the City by the Vikings Stadium Act of 2012.

    My top priority as mayor will be to eliminate systemic racism in employment, housing, the Court system and the Public School System. I advocate the establishment of a division in the City’s Civil Rights Department empowered to detect and prosecute those engaged in illegal, covert discrimination in the employment and housing markets. I advocate an end to the war on drugs, which has been extremely effective in criminalizing, marginalizing, and disenfranchising people of color. I advocate steps to eliminate systemic racism in the K-12 school system: Students of color are heavily exposed to less qualified and less experienced teachers, and more heavily concentrated in watered-down curriculum tracks. I oppose the corporate-style reforms, charter-ization and de-unionization of the Public School system that is being orchestrated at the federal level, and is being carried out by the State of MN and the Minneapolis Public Schools.

    Mann for Minneapolis Mayor

  8. Submitted by James Hamilton on 07/22/2013 - 03:41 pm.

    When I was a lad

    there was a term for this discussion, one which I don’t believe complies with MinnPost’s policies.

    It should come as a surprise to no one that the term “progressive” is no more capable of definition than are liberal and consvervative, as is demonstrated by the attempted definitions reported above. “Forward” is as relative a term as one could ask for, as are thoughtful, humane, smart-government, etc.

    How about we skip the labels and actually talk about how we’re going to address some specific problems?

  9. Submitted by Jeff Klein on 07/22/2013 - 04:02 pm.

    There is a difference

    There’s a difference between “liberal” and “progressive” and it matters, and I say this as someone who is content to label myself both. “Progressive” goes beyond being pro-government-to-solve problems – it is specifically anti-corporate and populist. To me it recalls both President Roosevelts, even though they were different on the conservative/liberal, Republican/Democrat spectrum.

    Given that, I think that Hodges stands out as the most “progressive” candidate, given that all of the others have ties to corporate welfare shenanigans in the recent past.

  10. Submitted by Bruce Bruemmer on 07/22/2013 - 10:18 pm.

    Even Fighting Bob La Follette

    was unable to put every “Progressive” under the same umbrella a century ago, so it is little wonder that the term defies definition today. Kudos to Samuels for refusing to play. This discussion is interesting because it is all about “branding.” You cannot brand yourself differently from the others if everyone is going to claim the same label. And if Cohen lets “other people put labels on me,” he may end up with a label he does not like. This will get interesting come election time, particularly with the new voting in place.

    Does anyone else think that Andrew claiming credit for the Greenway sounds a little like Al Gore and the Internet? Maybe he was the sole motivator, but I think a mayor who works with others towards a common goal sounds more effective in a “weak” mayor city, maybe even progressive.

  11. Submitted by Connie Sullivan on 07/23/2013 - 09:59 am.

    Karen Boros picked a great question to pose to these candidates! Their answers provide some of the most revealing differentiators among them.

    First, let’s dismiss the tautologies Don Samuels offers, playing around uselessly with the word “progress” as if we were all dummies. That’s political avoidance, so let’s avoid him.

    Then, let’s look at the specifics Jim Thomas provides: with those, he gives us an example of positions on issues that a political progressive advocates (the term is political, folks; you can’t have an apolitical progressive, because the term derives from an historical moment in politics). He just made a definitive jump into my short list of candidates to rank in November! Specific stands.

    Betsy Hodges is saying some similar good stuff. The Republicans Winton and Cohen avoid the issue, more or less like Samuels, and they are about as far from “progressive” as Andrew is. “Progressives” don’t have to exaggerate their histories, which Andrew does all the time.

    Let’s have more of this type of inquiry! Push all these candidates to go beyond blah-blah, good-sounding but empty soundbites.

  12. Submitted by Eric Snyder on 07/23/2013 - 01:44 pm.

    Anyone but Cam Winton

    Beyond labels, we need office holders who are capable of understanding the world in terms that are as accurate as possible, that reflect some minimum measure of cognitive complexity, that transcend simplistic slogans and caricatures. Exhibit A, from Cam Winton:

    ““On the term progressive, I think people use that term when they’re describing themselves as people who see a need for government to keep expanding, for government spending to keep increasing, despite the fact that we’re already squeezed,” said Winton. “When they see a policy goal, their first instinct is to use government, and government alone, to get there. I don’t share that belief.””

    This might sound perfectly accurate and reasonable…if you’re a listener to Rush Limbaugh or a Fox News viewer. As a statement about how liberals/progressive see themselves and what they actually do, it’s a basic misrepresentation, even a bit of rhetorical dishonesty, but one I suspect Winton is so used to saying to himself he doesn’t realize he’s pulled the wool over his own eyes.

    Our problems grow more complex, and as a consequence we need minds capable of meeting this complexity. Winton’s quote should be a red flag to any thinking citizen that, whatever political persuasion would be best for Mpls, we can’t afford Cam Winton.

Leave a Reply