Over these past weeks, I keep hearing how all the candidates are so alike.

I've been asked the question in the past about how I'm different, and I've given a solid answer. I am the only candidate that was raised in a low income family, I am the only candidate that is running strong on protecting our natural resources in addition to the other issues, and that all of my leadership in the community has been volunteer, not part of a paid job. And all that is true. But there is more to that answer that needs to be discussed. You see, all of my opponents got an A rating from the National Organization for Women. I didn't. I got a C, and it's important that you know why, partly because of the specific issue, but also because of what it says about who I am. So how is it that a radical, pro-choice, lesbian feminist gets a C rating from NOW? Read on..... As many of you already know, I was raised in a low income family. My father had an 8th grade education and supported his 8 kids by driving a taxi. We didn't have much money before he died, and things were even worse after. My mom used every program she could to keep a roof over our head and food on the table, and, to go to night school. One of my earliest memories is of her teaching herself to type on a manual typewriter, and doing the lessons from her classes, so she could get a job. She said over and over, education is the way out, and that we needed to prepare so we would never end up in the situation she was in. From those beginnings, and with other programs to help, all 8 of us went to college. This is why I have been such a passionate supporter of the DFL Party. Those free/reduced lunches, those aids for education and much more changed our lives. There is much more to be done! We must: - Improve transit options so people don't spend hours on buses like my mom did. - Raise the minimum wage so working actually pays the bills. - Have training programs for today's workforce, to get people into good jobs. - Provide quality childcare so people can work knowing their kids are safe. - Reduce college costs, and do more with PSEO's to increase access to college.

So, what is it that NOW and I disagreed on? On their questionnaire, they asked if I felt the current 5 year lifetime limit on welfare should be eliminated. I said no. They asked further if I supported eliminating welfare work requirements. Again, no. I know, from eating oatmeal for dinner, shopping for school clothes at rummage sales and watching my mom worry about bills every single day, I know what is at stake. I know that people want and need to be independent. We need to provide them the means to achieve that, and to achieve that in a reasonable amount of time. But there is more to this than just the welfare issue. What you need to know is that I knew I would take a hit for not answering yes to every answer. But, I will always tell the truth, even if there are political consequences. I will never hedge an answer, hoping to guess what the person wants to hear. I could have kept quiet about my C rating. Some of you may disagree with my stance on the limits for welfare. But I am not your average politician. I'm different. I'll take that C grade, because to me that C stands for conviction. If you want to talk about this, or anything else, come to my Open House! It is at my home, and I would love for you to come: Tuesday, March 4 from 6:30 PM to 9 PM 1917 Bohland Ave, St Paul, MN 55116 Also, I'm having a MEET and GREET at J&S Bean Factory Saturday, March 8 from 10 AM to 11 AM 1518 Randolph Ave, St Paul, MN 55105

Gloria Zaiger zaigerforhouse.com zaigerforhouse@gmail.com