June 21-22, 2008
Jun 21 00:43 Portrait Of a Postpartisan Politician? Jun 21 01:26 Flip-Flop On OCS Drilling? Who Cares? Jun 21 09:02 Michael Barone's Brilliance Displayed Again Jun 21 12:50 Listening Week Wrap-Up Jun 21 23:42 June Polls- Will This Year Be Different? Jun 22 04:27 Give Me A Break Jun 22 12:20 El Tinklenberg Endorsed By 'Jesse's Party' Jun 22 22:41 SC Times' 'Correction' About Heritage Nature Center
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Portrait Of a Postpartisan Politician?
Barack Obama once claimed to be beyond partisanship. His latest demagogic attack proves that he's a bitter partisan who is exploiting the fear/race card. Here's how clumsily he played the race card:
"It is going to be very difficult for Republicans to run on their stewardship of the economy or their outstanding foreign policy," Obama told a fundraiser in Jacksonville, Florida. "We know what kind of campaign they're going to run. They're going to try to make you afraid.Frankly, Barack Obama presents a great target for Republicans. He's clueless on foreign policy (He's said he'd meet with Ahmadinejad and Chavez before he said he'd meet with Gen. Petraeus); he's in the hip pocket of the environmental extremists on drilling on the OCS (Mark Warner, Jim Webb and Tim Kaine are at odds with him on that). Moreover, Obama thinks it's smart to give terrorists more rights than the Haditha Marines have received.
"They're going to try to make you afraid of me. He's young and inexperienced and he's got a funny name. And did I mention he's black?"
Worst of all, he's said that gas isn't too expensive, just that it got to $4/gallon too fast.
He's almost right about one thing. He says that Republicans will try to make voters afraid of him. I said almost because we won't have to. We'll merely point out when he says scary things. We'll point out his 24 flip-flop on Israel, first saying that we'd staunchly stand by Israel under all conditions, then backtracking a day later when Muslim special interest groups whined about that policy.
There's a purpose behind Obama's playing the race card. It's obvious that he'll pull that out of his pocket anytime Republicans point out his policy deficiencies. He'll then say that Republicans are racists who are making personal attacks on him and on his race.
He's hoping that his baseless accusations will divert attention away from his foreign policy ineptitude and his incoherence with regards to economic policy. We all remember his bumbling answer on capital gains taxes, right? If not, here's a reminder:
This is one of the clumsiest ways to play the race card I've ever seen. It's also worth noting that this is pure allegation on Sen. Obama's behalf:
"We know the strategy because they've already shown their cards. Ultimately I think the American people recognize that old stuff hasn't moved us forward. That old stuff just divides us," he said.TRANSLATION: In the Gospel according to the Obamessiah, Republicans are racist for pointing out his wife's anti-American statements. If you're gonna use her on the campaign trail, expect Republicans to critique what she says. Not only that but we'll critique what Sen. Obama says about our critiques.
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 12:44 AM
No comments.
Flip-Flop On OCS Drilling? Who Cares?
I've enjoyed myself this week as Democrats try applying the flip-flop tag on Sen. McCain for changing his mind of drilling on the OCS. Now they're attempting to apply that tag to Florida Governor Charlie Crist :
This week, Crist stunned many when he said he is now open to the idea of expanding oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, a reversal that's in step with McCain. Crist said Friday that he is not running for vice president and his recent comments weren't made to mirror the Arizona senator's.I'd bet that people won't care about the flip-flop as long as it drives gas prices down. To continue doing what we've been doing will keep crude oil prices excalating. As I pointed out here , the only smart energy policy is one that increases energy supply:
"It's born out of a concern for the people of Florida and their pocketbook. I hear it all the time, that $4 a gallon gasoline is hurting families," Crist said, emphasizing that he only supports a study on expanded drilling.
Critics say it's the most striking example of Crist's positions shifting to meet McCain's.
"Good energy policy is easy to distinguish from bad energy policy: Good policy leads to more supplies of affordable energy and bad policy leads to less."Let's face facts. People know that politicians change their minds all the time. That's factored into their opinions of politicians. That means, they'll likely appreciate it when politicians flip-flop into the right policy.
Let's put it another way. What's more likely to happen of these scenarios?
Will a person appreciate gas prices dropping as a result of a policy change? Or will the person say something like this: I don't care that gas prices have dropped. I don't care that I've got more cash in my wallet. I can't trust that guy and that's all that matters.
I'm betting that the vast majority of people will thank politicians for policies that drop gas prices.
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 1:27 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 21-Jun-08 08:39 AM
There is actually a perfect free market explanation for McCain's change of stance, if anybody cares. That is, that until the last few years, US oil was more costly to extract than foreign oil. Ignoring the political aspects, it made perfect sense to buy oil from the "lowest cost provider" and to "save" our oil until theirs ran out, then sell ours to them at an exorbitant price. Even the Saudis saw that one coming, and have been busy building solar plants and high-tech industry to sustain their economy. Now that that cost equation has been changed so radically, what makes sense is to tap the cheaper oil here at home.
Michael Barone's Brilliance Displayed Again
I've long thought that Michael Barone is one of the most intelligent political analysts in the business. RealClearPolitics links to his most recent analysis . The bad news for Democrats is that it contains alot of good news for Republicans, namely Barone's listing of how the facts have changed the direction of this race. Here's how Mr. Barone starts with Iraq:
In January 2007, when George W. Bush ordered the surge strategy, which John McCain had advocated since the summer of 2003, Barack Obama informed us that the surge couldn't work. The only thing to do was to get out as soon as possible.Facts matter except with Democratic activists. Once you enter the Democratic activists' world, though, anything that highlights inaccuracies in Democratic stump speeches is ignored and frequently chastized.
That stance proved to be a good move toward winning the presidential nomination but it was poor prophecy. It is beyond doubt now that the surge has been hugely successful, beyond even the hopes of its strongest advocates, like Frederick and Kimberly Kagan. Violence is down enormously, Anbar and Basra and Sadr City have been pacified, Prime Minister Maliki has led successful attempts to pacify Shiites as well as Sunnis, and the Iraqi parliament has passed almost all of the "benchmark" legislation demanded by the Democratic Congress, all of which Barack Obama seems to have barely noticed or noticed not at all. He has not visited Iraq since January 2006 and did not seek a meeting with Gen. David Petraeus when he was in Washington.
The bad news for Democrats is that the presidential race won't be won by Democrat activists. It will be decided by people that are open to hearing about improvements in Iraq.
Here's another of Michael Barone's observations:
Other examples of facts undermining Democratic narratives readily occur. Last week charges were dropped against the seventh of eight Marines accused of atrocities in Haditha. The narrative, peddled by Democratic Congressman (and Marine veteran) John Murtha, of depraved American soldiers massacring innocent Iraqis seems to be falling victim to the facts.It's the Right Blogosphere's duty to inform people of Murtha's corruption, something that we've done at Murtha Must Go. It's also the Right Blogosphere's duty to inform people of related corruption, specifically, informing them of Paul Kanjorski's admitting that Democrats lied to their activists about their ability to end the Iraq War.
Thouogh I don't see these incidents driving many voters from the blue column into the red column, they have a cumulative effect because they affect credibility. Once that's gone, the fight becomes an uphill fight.
And the fact of $4 gasoline has undermined the narrative that alternative forms of energy can painlessly supply our needs. Public opinion has switched sharply and now favors drilling offshore and, by inference, in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Democrats are scrambling to argue that drilling wouldn't make any difference, and that anyway the oil companies aren't drilling enough on federal land they currently lease.I suspect that this issue will effect House and Senate races more than it'll affect the presidential race. That isn't to say that it won't have an impact on the presidential campaign, just that the impact on the House and Senate races will be bigger.
Part of that advantage will be due in part to the NRCC pushing this agenda alot harder than Sen. McCain will be pushing it. While Sen. McCain is sure to talk about it in his stump speech, drilling on the OCS and in ANWR will be the majority of House and Senate candidates' speeches.
Locally, Elwyn Tinklenberg and Al Franken will be fighting an uphill fight the rest of the way because they're totally locked into the environmentalists' position. That gives Michele Bachmann and Norm Coleman a significant advantage in those races.
All of this matters because the rejection of the Republicans in the 2006 elections was a verdict on competence more than ideology. The Republicans seemed incompetent at relieving victims of Katrina, producing success in Iraq and even policing the House page programs. The Democrats could not do worse and might do better. But in the 19 months since November 2006, some important facts have changed.Democrats are wed to being ideologically pure because that's what the Nutroots demands of them.
Finally this is a great question that the Right Blogosphere should ask of liberal candidates:
When asked why he changed his position on an issue, John Maynard Keynes said: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 9:03 AM
No comments.
Listening Week Wrap-Up
9:58-- I'm at the first annual Listening Week wrap-up. It looks like the event won't get started on time because the crowd is just filing in. Larry Haws & Steve Gottwalt are here but Tarryl is noticeable in her absence.
10:02-- Mayor Kleis is calling the meeting to order. Elected officials are taking their places. The crowd is sparse, likely because of the gorgeous weather outside. Right now, there are 18 citizens in the audience.
10:05-- Mayor Kleis is announcing that Sen. Coleman & Sen. Klobuchar won't be here but that Rep. Bachmann will be here at 11:00.
10:07-- Mayor Kleis needles George Hontos about keeping introductions brief, which draws a nice chuckle.
10:10-- Tarryl arrives.
10:12-- John Seelhammer is talking about seeing more bikes being ridden with gas high. He's suggesting that we need more bike trails. Mayor Kleis says that they won't respond to each issue but that they're compiling a list of all suggestions from the week. As soon as Mayor Kleis says this, Tarryl says that her & her husband took a bike ride, going to Paneira, then to Farmers' market.
10:14-- A gentleman is criticizing Tarryl's per diem bill. The gentleman is praising Michele Bachmann for her fighting against earmarks. He says that they should be voted on, not just dropped into the hopper.
10:20-- Hazel is worried about deep cuts in social programs. It sounds like she's advocating modest increases rather than wild budgeting swings.
10:25-- Steve Hennes, director at Whitney Senior Center & Sartell city council member is talking about the cooperation between cities on putting in bike trails. Very optimistic attitude shows.
10:27-- Mark Sakry is talking about the Wobegon Trail being a priority. Mayor Kleis is talking about Sportsman Island bike trail. Mayor Kleis mentions that the shoulders on the new DeSoto Bridge will be 10' wide instead of the old shoulders of 4'.
10:30-- Talk now is about the commuter rail & related issues. Everyone there is for it. They're also mentioning that there will be a bus to take people from St. Cloud to Big Lake.
10:32-- Tarryl talking about all the hard work done for commuter line, then says that federal regulations changed, which makes it more of a challenge.
10:35-- Ted Benske asks if it's possible to bring in green jobs. Mayor Kleis uses the opportunity to tout the geothermal system that's being installed in the MAC.
10:43-- Larry Haws announces that he's leaving for another event. Great cheers are heard, smiles are abundant. Then he says that Steve Gottwalt is a state senator, which Steve questions. Larry's response is that Steve should pay attention in a playful way. Steve asks when Steve became a senator, at which point Larry realizes he screwed up. It's one of the funniest moments of the event.
10:45-- Steve is talking about funding education. Steve says that we need to define what schools are cutting energy supposed to do. He says that we need to talk about academic achievement. He says that we could've done a better job funding education. Steve asks "if we're going to fund education from the state level, will we lose local control?"
10:55-- Bruce Mohs: "We go out for these bond referenda not for excesses but for necessities." He's essentially saying that there isn't any waste.
11:00-- Michele arrives. She announces that they're working on getting a hearing for increasing energy supplies.
11:07-- John Wertz says that he didn't hear anything about pre-K. "It clearly helps."
11:10-- Steve's talking about his visit to DCI, which is making renewable energy. "We're on a par with everyone in the state" on bioscience.
11:15-- Citizen asks why St. Cloud is planning on selling off the Heritage Nature Center. Mayor Kleis explains that there aren't any plans for selling off that land. Mayor Kleis also says that others are using the Center. We'll use the Center like we use other facilities. He cites Wilson Park & other city parks. Kleis says it'll save St. Cloud $135K this year & $185K next year. "SCSU is excited about programming at the Nature Center."
11:25-- Larry's back. Tarryl left.
11:30-- Steve's talking about "a disturbing trend with parents" not making their children a priority.
11:45-- Citizen asks why Michele is pushing oil drilling instead of biothermal energy, etc. Michele then explains that Congress hasn't taken action on extending tax credits for alternatives, a clear shot at the do-nothing congress. She then says that only 3% of leased lands have the energy they're looking for. OCS has 86 billion barrels, ANWR has 10 billion barrels. "We're for an all of the above policy." "We have more oil in [mountain west] than in Saudi Arabia." As expected, she's drilling the questioner with facts, dispelling the myths out there.
"Every local unit of government is hurt" by not getting energy costs down. Now she's talking about nuclear power. She's saying that "we can lead in wind. We can lead in biomass."
11:55-- My question: When are we going to get a pro-growth tax system in Minnesota. Larry gives a non-responsive response, which was predictable. Steve directly addresses the issue. He says that we need to make sure that we don't hurt the job creators. Steve also says that we can't afford to damage job creation through the tax code.
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 5:01 PM
No comments.
June Polls- Will This Year Be Different?
Powerline's John Hinderaker has an interesting post up about June presidential polls and how accurate they are compared with election results. John makes this observation:
In other words, the June polls have come closer to predicting the actual result in every recent Presidential cycle.John's point about Republicans not taking comfort in June polling is worthwhile. My question is whether this year is an anomaly because of the volatility caused by high gas prices.
This may be because improved polling techniques are giving a better read on the electorate, earlier. You could test this theory by checking later poll averages against actual results; I haven't tried to do that. Another possibility is that our politics have become increasingly polarized, so that fewer voters change their minds over the course of a campaign. Either way, recent history suggests that we Republicans shouldn't take too much comfort from the memory of Michael Dukakis.
John's point that we've become a more polarized nation isn't arguable. That's certainly happened. That said, I've often thought that the energy issue is one of those rare instances that a single issue moves people from the blue column into the red column. It's an issue that's changing turnout, too.
2008 isn't like 2006. In 2006, people didn't switch from Republican to Democrats as much as Republicans just stayed home. In 2008, alot of Democrats will likely switch their votes simply because they can't afford to the Democrats' energy policies. At minimum, that issue has the potential of moving independent voters.
I think it's also important to note that the polling isn't the only indicator that this will be a better year for Republicans than first imagined. I'm not predicting retaking the House and Senate by any stretch. What I'm ruling out are the dire predictions that Republicans will lost a dozen seats in the Senate and 40-50 seats in the House. Those numbers are mindbogglingly stupid at this point.
Another indicator that I'm paying attention to is the fundraising numbers of Obama and the DNC. Cash isn't flowing into Obama's coffers the way it used to. In fact, it's been cut in half since his high water mark of $50 million. The DNC has had a miserable time raising money all year long. The DNCC is well behind in its goals.
Still another indicator that I'm watching is how reticent Hillary's supporters contribute to Obama's campaign. If those numbers lag, then Obama will be fighting uphill the rest of the way, expecially since he's spending money at an alarming rate.
This race has a chance of turning volatile for several reasons. The energy issue is heading in the wrong direction for him. Fundraising is drying up, at least to the point where he won't have a substantial advantage. That's before we start talking about the poor recruiting year Democrats had with House candidates.
Posted Saturday, June 21, 2008 11:43 PM
Comment 1 by Walter hanson at 22-Jun-08 01:53 PM
You know there is one other thing Gary.
In 2006 those Republicans who stayed home or voted Democrat as a protest vote have seen evidence of what that did.
On the state level the gasoline tax and other taxes shoved down our throat!
On the federal level where the Democrats don't care about the price of oil, wanting to lose the war on Iraq etc.
They understand the importance of the Supreme Court and how the next appointment will be.
All of that will drive Republican votes not being measured. At the same there are Democrats and independents who understand that this isn't what I voted for.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 22-Jun-08 03:40 PM
Valid points all, Walter. I don't disagree a bit.
Comment 3 by MPRed at 22-Jun-08 07:59 PM
"alot" is two words. "A lot"
Comment 4 by MPRed at 22-Jun-08 07:59 PM
Statement deleted for profanity. The First Amendment gives people freedom of speech. I'll limit free speech when it's profanity-laced.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 22-Jun-08 08:42 PM
"alot" is two words. "A lot"
It's 2 words in modern English but it's 1 word in real English. Back when they taught the real thing, it was 1 word.
Give Me A Break
Tarryl Clark has written a whopper of an editorial in this morning's St. Clouid Times. Frankly, I can't understand how on God's green earth she can say some of the things she said. Here's an example:
For the last two sessions Senate DFL and Republican leadership adopted difficult but realistic deadlines for the various committees to complete their work. This enabled floor debates and votes to be done in a timely fashion and to create another set of deadlines for conference committees to work out differences between House and Senate language.While it's true that this year's session went smoother, it's equally true that the ending of the 2007 session in the House was chaotic. As I noted here , Margaret Anderson-Kelliher said that they "just ran out of time":
Maggie Kelliher said that they "just ran out of time" before blaming it on the GOP for filibustering things the last couple hours.The groundwork for the last night's chaos was established during the House Permanent Rules debate :
FAIR NOTICE ON BUDGET BILLS: Under current rules, the majority is required to announce by 5:00 on the preceding day when major finance bills will be considered by the full House. Under the DFL's proposed rules, that would be cut to two-hour's notice on the day of the bill hearing. Rep. Dean Simpson (R-New York Mills) asked the House to expand that to six hours' notice so that citizens with an interest in the bill could be outside the House chamber to provide expertise and guidance to Representatives on the House Floor. The DFL killed the A-32 amendment with a procedural motion by a 79-50 vote.There's only one reason why the DFL wanted a 2 hour notice. That's because they wanted to cram some things through at the last moment without the GOP knowing what they were voting for or against. That isn't how open government works. That's how a tyrant operates.
Next Tarryl says that she was disappointed that Gov. Pawlenty didn't meet in public with the House and Senate leadership to negotiate the budget:
With over three weeks to go in the session, leadership called upon the governor to publicly meet and negotiate the remaining issues.Tarryl, when was the last time a governor met with the legislature in public to negotiate a budget deal? BTW, I don't recall hearing any complaints in 2007 when the budget negotiations weren't public. Why the big stink about it now?
Unfortunately, while the governor did agree to meet and negotiate, he refused to do so in public. We were left with the poor choice of either not negotiating at all or doing so behind closed doors.
Here's the final laugher:
I welcome your call for open negotiations and hope that next year the governor will heed your advice.Before Tarryl starts whining about Gov. Pawlenty's actions, she'd be wise to get Sen. Pogemiller and Rep. Sertich under control. Their actions say that they hate openness. The light of day doesn't fit their bullying tactics. I'd further remind Tarryl that the House DFL leadership doubled their operating budget from #324,000 to $646,000 :
Seifert said at a time when schools and nursing homes are struggling to make their budgets, House Democrats chose to almost double its operations budget from $324,000 to $646,000 during a House Rules Committee meeting in August .Perhaps Tarryl can explain how doubling the House's operations budget while the legislature isn't in session and out of camera range is the model for how open, accountable governments operate.
"We gave schools a mere 3 percent increase for the biennium and nursing homes received even less than that but then gave gigantic increases to the Legislature," Seifert said. "This is a matter of priorities. The Democrats ran on fiscal responsibility and leadership. They have failed to demonstrate either during their reign of confusion in the Minnesota House. When House Republicans are in charge, we will restore fiscal sanity by cutting the number of committees by more than 50 percent and returning costs to prior levels."
Tarryl's editorial should be ridiculed. Before she starts lecturing people about open, accountable government, she'd be wise to practice what she preaches.
Posted Sunday, June 22, 2008 4:27 AM
Comment 1 by J Ledesma at 23-Jun-08 07:33 AM
Great job of ripping Clark by tying her to the actions of the Minnesota House, even though she's not a member of that body.
Politically, Clark has to be taken down, even if we have to use fallacy to do it!
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 23-Jun-08 07:56 AM
the reason why I tied her to the actions in the House is because the DFL had a strategy of letting the House do the dirty work so the Senate could look 'above the fray'.
Tarryl is a political opportunist, not a reformer. That's why she didn't complain about private negotiations before. Suddenly she's all for public negotiations after the Times writes an editorial about it? That's political opportunism, my friend.
BTW, Tarryl didn't have a problem with a committee passing their massive per diem increase so that the full Senate didn't have to vote on it.
Fortunately, Ray Vandeveer held Tarryl's feet to the fire as well as the DFL leadership.
Political opportunism, Thy name is Tarryl.
El Tinklenberg Endorsed By 'Jesse's Party'
It isn't often that a candidate gets endorsed by two separate political parties but, according to this post , that's exactly what happened. As interesting as the Independence Party's endorsement is, that isn't what caught my attention in the post. This is what caught my attention:
As voters reject Michele Bachmann's do-nothing, extremist agenda, the momentum behind El Tinklenberg's candidacy continues to transcend partisan politics. A growing cross-partisan coalition in the 6th District is calling for change and a return to common-sense government.El Tinklenberg is the last person that should be yapping about do-nothing, extremist agenda. After all, he's the guy who ignored an engineering company's recommendations to replace the gusset plates on the I-35 Bridge.
That's the picture of 'dangerous do-nothingism'.
Let's remember, too, that this is the guy that promised to vote for impeaching President Bush before articles of impeachment had even been debated in the House Judiciary Committee. That's what it looks like when a candidate panders to MoveOn.org's extremists.
MoveOn.org's extremists aren't the only extremists that Tinklenberg panders to , either:
The evidence is in and speaks overwhelmingly; global climate change is real. It's the biggest long-term challenge our nation and world face. Those who continue to deny its reality gamble with our children's and grandchildren's futures. We need to reduce America's dependence on the coal and petroleum products that are the primary causes of global warming. Alternatives can be made available in bio-derived, nuclear, solar, and wind energy.Yesterday, at the Listening Week Wrap-up , Michele Bachmann said that she supports an 'all of the above' approach to energy independence. She spoke about wanting to extend tax credits for developing alternative fuels but that the Democratic leadership hasn't acted on that yet. She's also advocated for drilling on the OCS, in ANWR and in the Mountain West. She also advocated for building nuclear power plants.
By comparison, El Tinklenberg has talked only about renewables thus far. Based on that information, it's accurate to say that El Tinklenberg supports a 'most of the above' energy plan. The reason why he doesn't favor drilling is because he must pander to the environmentalists for campaign contributions.
If citizens asked him to pledge to support an 'all of the above' approach to energy independence, he wouldn't support it until after giving a wink and a nod to his environmentalist allies.
That isn't leadership. That's spinelessness. that isn't people on main street think. That's how people on K Street think, which is only natural since Tinklenberg's a lobbyist.
Posted Sunday, June 22, 2008 12:20 PM
Comment 1 by MPRed at 22-Jun-08 07:57 PM
Profanity-laced comments will be deleted.
Comment 2 by eric zaetsch at 12-Jul-08 11:37 AM
Anyone who would want to impeach George W. Bush can't be all bad.
Moving on, and presuming Jesse files, what's your call on what Wodele does? Stay with Tinklenberg, or move to Jesse?
His roots go with the ex-Guv.
And from comment 1, can I at least put in a @#&^#&$^*&$%33 instead of any particular words?
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 12-Jul-08 01:12 PM
can I at least put in a @#&^#&$^*&$%33 instead of any particular words?
Most definitely. MPRed's comment was a profanity-laced personal attack which he didn't bother backing up with proof.
SC Times' 'Correction' About Heritage Nature Center
Today, the SC Times issued a non-correction correction on the status of the Heritage Nature Center. The Times originally got a few facts wrong, then compounded the problem with an editorial based on those wrong facts. Here's how the Times issued their correction without admitting their guilt:
Despite canceling summer programs and moving a staff member to another position, St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis said Friday that the grounds of Heritage Park Nature Center are open to the public.Those rumors have swirled because of an editorial in the Times that contained some inaccuracies. That's led to people making all kinds of assumptions.
While the public hours of operation for the building at the park have ended, it is still available for use, Kleis said.
Rumors have swirled since the city announced last month that the nature center's programs were canceled. The programs had declining participation and the city cut them to help deal with budget constraints.
for instance, a gentleman asked Mayor Kleis why St. Cloud was selling the land out from underneath the Nature Center. Mayor Kleis said that that wasn't happening, that it had never been discussed as a possibility.
The cuts will save the city more than $300,000 in the next two years. The people affected by the program cancellations have been able to sign up for similar programs run by St. Cloud State University, he said.the total expected savings will be $320,000 over the next 2 years, with the city saving $135,000 this year, $185,000 next year. That's the figures that Mayor Kleis gave during yesterday's Listening Week Wrap-Up .
During the summer, the building was open to the public for six hours on Saturdays. It no longer has those hours, but it still can be used for special events, Kleis said.I just returned from attending Mayor Kleis's townhall meeting at the Nature Center. While it was a very informal meeting, alot of information was provided to the half dozen of us that attended. One thing that Mayor Kleis said was that there would likely be a fee to use the Nature Center building if a private group wanted to use the facility but that there wouldn't be a fee charged to the school district or SCSU.
The other thing that's noteworthy about closing this is that Mayor Kleis said that, in addition to saving the city $135,000 this year and $185,000 in 2009, the money saved will strengthen other Park and Rec programs that have alot higher attendance. The lesson to be learned is that St. Cloud's budgeting saved taxpayers money while strengthening vital programs.
That's the benefit of fiscal discipline. It's proof positive that prioritization works.
Of course, the Times article wouldn't be complete without a few whiners complaining that they were fiscally responsible. Here's the best example of hysterics:
scabc123 wrote:My first reaction to that comment was "Why was the city employing a City Naturalist?" My second reaction was to ask why the city's taxpayers were paying $135,000 this year for 86 children in a summer program? That's a cost of $1,569 per child.
What the City does not share with you is that they already had 86 children registered for summer programs that they had to call to tell them it was cancelled. What the City does not disclose either is that the employee had to take a cut in pay. What the City does not tell you either is that full time employee was told she would need to take a cut in hours after one year to a three quarter time position. The employee was the City Naturalist.
Fortunately, sane people eventually prevailed:
commongal wrote:What I found interesting was that Mayor Kleis called surrounding communities to see if they'd cut their Park and Rec budgets. He was told that St. Cloud was the only city in the Greater St. Cloud area that has a Park and Rec Department, that Waite Park, Sauk Rapids, Sartell, etc., run their programs through their school district or community education budgets.
St. Cloud has lots of day camps. I send my kids to SCSUs camp and it is far better than the city offered. I'm glad they are going to be working with the city. The boys and girls club has programs, YMCA, 4H, community education and I know of a ton of other St. Cloud programs. I think the city made the right decision.
Finally, it's worth pointing out that this is the expected liberal reaction after a duplicate program is eliminated or cut. They can't imagine how the government could cut THEIR program. They can't imagine why taxpayers demand that programs be justified yearly rather than just increasing the budget each year.
That explains why liberals often don't think twice about increasing taxes. That's the price of never cutting wasteful programs.
One last lesson learned from this is that boisterous minorities can make it sound like there's alot of opposition to prioritizing spending when the reality is that a majority of taxpayers are thankful that politicians protect citizens' pocketbooks first.
Posted Sunday, June 22, 2008 10:41 PM
No comments.
