Final Minnesota innovation report card: Horner tops Emmer, Dayton

It seems eons ago when the first cattle rush for Minnesota’s governor’s office appeared on stage at the BIO forum in April.

The results of that debate were abysmal for innovation. None of the six candidates, including eventual GOP nominee Tom Emmer and Independence Party hopeful Tom Horner, uttered the words “medical device” or articulated policies that could best support Minnesota’s innovation ecosystem.

Now eight months later, on the eve of Election Day, the candidates have had time to educate themselves and think about what they could do as governor to develop Minnesota’s medical economy, which by the way, produces the lion’s share of  job growth, and the best-paying ones, at that.

So here are the updated results:

Tom Horner: A-

Previous grade: C

Sometimes, showing up is half the battle.

Perhaps third-party candidates just need extra attention, but Horner is the only candidate that has invested a significant amount of time on high-tech innovation. The former public relations executive has demonstrated firm competency, and more impressively, articulated specific proposals, not just broad philosophical outlines.

For example, it was heartening to hear Horner mention words like  “venture capitalists,” “Third Frontier Ohio,” “Biomedical [Discovery] District” and “Wisconsin” without being prompted during a recently taped interview with the Minnesota High Tech Association (MHTA). (Horner, by the way, was the only candidate to sit down with the MHTA.)

“I believe in the research that comes out of our universities and our private sector,” Horner said. “We will create the next big company with Minnesota knowledge, talent and ideas. My fear is that next big company will have a Wisconsin address.”

Horner summed up the state’s hope and peril in one quote. But here ‘s what he intends to do about it:

• Establish a $145 million Minnesota Innovation Fund to defray start-up costs.
• Spend $30 million on basic and applied research at Minnesota’s two-year and four-year colleges and universities, beyond the University of Minnesota. The $30 million also would be a permanent line item in the state budget.
• Expand the angel investment tax credit, including a possible provision that helps investors write off losses against investment income.

LifeScience Alley (LSA), the state’s largest medical technology industry group, doesn’t officially endorse candidates. But LSA seems to favor Horner.

“Only Tom Horner does not have a glaring negative,” the LSA’s monthly political newsletter said.

Tom Emmer: B

Previous grade: F

Emmer has attracted significant support from the business community, including Twin Cities Angels president John Alexander and medical device entrepreneur Mark Kroll. And for good reason.

Though a little late to the party, Emmer supports expanding the angel investment and the research and development tax credits. He proposes gradually repealing Minnesota’s corporate income tax and providing a 10 percent tax cut beginning in 2011 of active pass-through income for S-corporations, partnerships, and LLCs, namely younger companies like startups.

My knock on Emmer is that he sometimes seems more interested in ideological toughness than practical, case-by-case solutions.

He doesn’t miss an opportunity to espouse a conservative “government is the problem, the private sector can do no wrong” philosophy. Economic development and high-tech innovation should be non-partisan affairs, especially when the state legislature likely will remain Democrat-controlled.

For example, in response to a question from LSA, MHTA, MN Nano, and the BioBusiness Alliance of Minnesota about the recently created Minnesota Science and Technology Authority, Emmer wrote:

Government can and should provide incentives for our high-tech employers, and I am inclined to support some form of a Science and Technology Initiative. I do have concerns that a government-centric model for such an initiative may not be the best approach. Instead I prefer the model of a non-profit funded by private industry, with a private Board of Directors which includes a Governor’s appointee as liaison. A government entity is too likely to become captured by politics or bogged down in bureaucracy.

But a private-only authority might not have the necessary clout to promote real change.  In states like California and Massachusetts, the government plays a pivotal role in fostering a thriving technology cluster. Ohio’s Third Frontier program, from which Minnesota Science and Technology initiative took some of its inspiration, is an active partnership between government, academia and industry.

Mark Dayton: F

Previous grade: F

The grade speaks for itself. Dayton, a Democrat, has shown absolutely no growth in understanding nor interest in high-tech innovation in medical and biosciences. No mentions of angel credits, startups or venture capital.

His economic plan consists of  old, tired ideas on promoting tourism, green energy, agriculture and manufacturing — not exactly the stuff that fires up the imagination for the 21st Century economy. And of course, Dayton’s signature “soak the rich” tax plan would not make it easy for investors to write checks.

Dayton also likes to note that he was commissioner of the state Department of Energy and Economic Development, more than 20 years ago.

The former U.S. Senator did provide a little color in answering questions from the LSA, MHTA and others:

Government needs to be an active partner in supporting emerging industries and emerging companies. Specifically, I would develop greater private-sector leadership in the Science & Technology Authority, develop statewide broadband to ensure that start-ups can locate across the state, and foster greater collaboration between higher education and private industry so that researchers can do a better job seeding spin off businesses.

But Dayton does not offer any specific ideas on how to do any of that. Too little, too late.

Happy voting!!!