Keith Ellison, Jim Schultz square off in second attorney general debate
MINNEAPOLIS – DFL incumbent Attorney General Keith Ellison and GOP challenger Jim Schultz went head-to-head on Monday in their second debate in three days. It comes as recent polling shows them in a statistical dead heat to be the state's top legal officer.
A new MinnPost poll published Monday has both tied with 47% of likely voters supporting them. An additional 5% are undecided. It's one of the closest statewide matchups on the ballot this fall.
The two sparred in their second of four debates, though many of the main talking points were the same as their first showdown Friday, including the alleged fraud by Feeding our Future and the attorney general's role when it comes to crime.
Schultz wants the office to more aggressively go after violent crime, which spiked in Minnesota last year, vowing to beef up the criminal division. Ellison maintains the main the role of the attorney general is to protect consumers and represent state agencies in legal matters, and that the office can help with local prosecutions when asked.
On Monday, the candidates spent a significant portion of the hour-and-a-half debate hosted by WCCO Radio arguing about Ellison's support for a failed Minneapolis charter amendment last year that would've replaced the police department with a department of public safety.
"It was immoral to propose taking away from disadvantaged communities, vulnerable communities that are consumed by crime and violence the fundamental protections of law enforcement," Schultz said. "That was deeply, deeply disturbing and that in itself is enough not to elect Keith Ellison."
Ellison defended his position and said he never supported defunding the police, accusing Schultz of "standing from a distance throwing rocks" on the issue. He
said Minneapolis is making progress with its new office of community safety and new policies for hiring and training officers.
"The things I was supporting and the reasons I was supporting it are being achieved," Ellison said. "The fact is we need a conversation about how to make sure police and community are working together in a way that's best for both."
Ellison contrasted his credentials with those of Schultz, a political outsider who most recently worked at an investment firm. He hit Schultz for lack of courtroom experience.
When asked by a moderator why he hasn't shared a list of his clients, Schultz said he represented a "wide swath of clients in his career," but spoke only in generalities, citing court rules prohibiting disclosure.
"This is a very clear contrast as to who you're gonna get: a consumer advocate, a worker's advocate, or a hedge fund Wall Street lawyer," Ellison said.
Democrats have occupied the attorney general's office for more than five decades. With polling showing a tight race, Republicans see this office as an opportunity to break their losing streak for statewide office, which they haven't won since 2006.
Among the top issues for voters are abortion and crime, the MinnPost survey found.
"The attorney general doesn't go to court. The attorney general is about leading an office of a couple hundred people, setting policy, working with the legislature to get important legislation through," Schultz said. "We need an attorney general with the right priorities that can drive this office to a better place."
The alleged fraud scheme by Feeding our Future to steal $250 million intended for needy children also took center stage as it did in the first debate. Schultz again argued that Ellison did not do enough to stop the stealing of the federal funds.
"It demonstrated historic incompetence that led to historic fraud," Schultz said.
Ellison characterized the work as a successful investigation and prosecution, and blamed Schultz for "playing politics" with it to score votes ahead of an election.
"We did what we were supposed to do. We got 49 indictments for it. And that is the fact of the matter," he said.
RELATED: Who is funding fiery new ad accusing AG Keith Ellison of being "anti-cop"?
