May 10-11, 2009
May 10 01:16 The GOP's Closing Argument? May 10 02:20 The DFL's Uphill Fight May 10 08:56 Fred Barnes' Best column Ever? May 11 01:42 Seat-Of-The-Pants Taxation May 11 11:00 The DFL's Tax Insanity Continues May 11 12:18 What Priorities? May 11 14:56 DFL Lobbying Rally Today
The GOP's Closing Argument?
This post is what I'd recommend the GOP use in its closing arguments against tax increases.
Since the DFL's 'solution' includes raising taxes, we should force the DFL to tell us why they're insisting on raising taxes that drive businesses to Wisconsin and South Dakota. We should also ask them why they've either not noticed or not cared that our neighbors' tax systems are more business friendly.
Wisconsin stands a good chance of luring VitalMedix, Inc. to their state because their tax code gives incentives to capitalist risk takers. The Sioux Falls Development Foundation is actively recruiting medical research companies to move or expand to their city. They're doing this by telling businesses that they've got the best tax system in the United States while telling entrepreneurs that Minnesota's tax system is next-to-last.
Meanwhile, Ann Lenczewski tried passing a Tax Increase Bill that eliminated the charitable giving and mortgage interest deductions while creating a fourth income tax bracket with a marginal rate of 9%. The bill was so awful that Gene Pelowski voted against that bill and the bill cobbled together in the dead of night Thursday night.
If I was in the Minnesota House, I'd remind the DFL that they said they want to balance the budget while "positioning Minnesota" to make a quick recovery. I'd then insist that they answer how Minnesota will be well-positioned for a quick recovery if businesses are fleeing the state because taxes were too burdensome.
Finally, I'd insist that the DFL explain why they weren't able to use their out-of-session hearings to identify cost savings that would've shrunk the deficit in preparation for this session.
The DFL won't answer that question. In fact, they'd rather ignore that question altogether. It's the MOB's responsibility to keep reminding the DFL that they're playing a losing hand.
Even with that pressure, I still think that we're heading for a special session. There's speculation on whether that favors the GOP or the DFL. I'm betting that we've got the upper hand because Gov. Pawlenty won't call a special session until there's an agreement prior to calling the session. Whenever that happens, the DFL has lost those negotiation.
There's other speculation on whether that balance tips if we pass the June 30th end of the current biennium. I don't think it does because we've got the ability to remind people that tax increases send businesses fleeing to South Dakota. Posts with titles like "DFL Insists on Tax Increases While Businesses Leave" would keep the scales tipped in the GOP's favor.
Posted Sunday, May 10, 2009 1:16 AM
No comments.
The DFL's Uphill Fight
Last year, the DFL got the votes it needed to override Gov. Pawlenty's veto of the Transportation Bill because the Minnesota Chamber of commerce came out in favor of it. This year, they won't get that benefit with their tax increase schemes:
One key player in influencing how a confrontation might play out is the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, which had an influential role last year in the House override of Pawlenty on a $6.6 billion transportation funding bill that included the first state gas tax increase in 20 years. The Chamber supported that tax. But Tom Hesse, a spokesman for the organization, said Saturday that it does not support the latest proposal that Pawlenty vetoed.The DFL's task got more difficult after the Minnesota Chamber announced its opposition to the DFL's tax increases. The DFL's case for tax increases was difficult before that because Sen. Bakk savaged Rep. Lenczewski's Tax Increase Bill. So did Rep. Pelowski . Here's what Bakk said:
Senate Taxes Committee Chairman Tom Bakk, DFL-Cook, said eliminating the current mortgage interest deduction could hurt Minnesota's high rate of home ownership and higher alcohol taxes would drive some liquor shoppers across the Wisconsin border.Here's what Rep. Pelowski said:
Pelowski said lawmakers won't have enough votes to override a Pawlenty veto of a DFL tax plan, and said the proposals are a "fiction" that will force lawmakers to scramble to craft another budget proposal after Pawlenty's veto. "We have to do what is real and not go through an exercise of what-ifs,'" Pelowski said. "There are no what-ifs. There is only the stark reality of this budget deficit."How can the DFL hope to override Gov. Pawlenty's veto of the Tax Increase Bill when they don't even have their senior members on board? It's easier to rake leaves with a shovel than it is to override Gov. Pawlenty's veto when the DFL is this fractured.
House Majority Leader Tony Sertich, DFL-Chisholm, was more combative, saying Pawlenty had now turned down several DFL proposals and needed to come up with new alternatives. "The governor's been stuck in his ways since January," Sertich said. "The governor's looking for us to agree with him on everything."If Gov. Pawlenty's plan keeps taxes stable, then it follows that businesses won't leave like they would if the DFL's Tax Increase Bill were passed and signed into law. Since it's preferable to prevent businesses from leaving the state, it's fitting that the DFL accept Gov. Pawlenty's plan.
I'd say different if the DFL's plan had a chance of getting Minnesota's economy growing again. Their plan is all pain and no prosperity. The DFL's plan is a ripoff for Minnesota families. Gov. Pawlenty politely said no thanks on behalf of Minnesota's citizens. I'd love seeing the DFL defend its tax increases while capital is fleeing the state at a worrisome rate.
Good luck with that one, DFL.
Posted Sunday, May 10, 2009 2:20 AM
No comments.
Fred Barnes' Best column Ever?
After reading Fred Barnes' column , I'm wondering if it's his best column ever. First, there's alot of reasons to like Fred's column. Let's start with this observation:
Many Republicans recoil from being combative adversaries of a popular president. They shouldn't. Opposing Obama across-the-board on his sweeping domestic initiatives makes sense on substance and politics. His policies--on spending, taxes, health care, energy, intervention in the economy, etc.--would change the country in ways most Americans don't believe in. That's the substance. And a year or 18 months from now, after those policies have been picked apart and exposed and possibly defeated, the political momentum is likely to have shifted away from Obama and Democrats.The morning after the 2006 massacre, I wrote a post saying that President Bush and the Republicans should start picking fights. I haven't changed my mind. Poll after poll shows that President Obama is popular but his policies aren't. Eventually, people won't be wowwed by him. They'll simply want to know whether his policies are making their 401(k)s bigger and whether the economy is creating jobs. They won't much care if President Obama claims that his policies kept job losses at a minimum.
Eventually, Republicans will have to come up with an appealing agenda to give people a reason to vote for them. That time isn't now. Now's the time when they seperate themselves from President Obama's and Speaker Pelosi's irresponsible spending habits. That alone sends a strong signal that business as usual in Washington is coming to a halt.
That's important because people are sick of this administration's affection for bailouts and industry nationalization schemes. It won't take much to win on the spending issue if they've already convinced people that Obama and Pelosi don't have the nation's best interests at heart.
Here's another important observation from Mr. Barnes's column:
If Republicans scan their history, they'll discover unbridled opposition to bad Democratic policies pays off. Those two factors, unattractive policies plus strong opposition, were responsible for the Republican landslides in 1938, 1946, 1966, 1980, and 1994. A similar blowout may be beyond the reach of Republicans in 2010, but stranger things have happened in electoral politics. They'll lose nothing by trying.A sports analogy illustrates my point perfectly here. In 1980, sportswriters asked whether Herb Brooks should shoot for the gold or if he should settle for a bronze or silver medal. At the time, I thought it was a stupid question because Herb Brooks never 'settled' for anything less than the best. Still, I saw where the sportswriters were coming from.
The Soviet team's roster, as they were called then, was filled with stars like Vladislav Tretiak, the best goalie in international history, defensemen like Kasatanov and Pervyukhin and forwards like Kharlimov, Maltsev and Makarov. This was a team with all stars at every position. More importantly, they played as a team.
The thing is, Herb Brooks noticed that they were playing sloppy. I remember reading an SI article after the Olympics ended in which Brooks said that he noticed their line changes weren't crisp like past Soviet teams and that their decisions weren't the high quality decisions that was their hallmark.
Smart people like Newt Gingrich, Dick Morris and Karl Rove are noticing the chinks in the Democrats' armor. They look formidable with huge margins in the House and Senate and a popular president at the other end of Pennsylvania Ave. Still, they're pushing stunningly unpopular legislation that's giving the Republicans something to exploit.
The point is that going all out doesn't cost the GOP anything. If they 'only' experience a gain of 25 seats, they'll still be in a more powerful position in the next congress while creating a little momentum heading into 2012. If things break right, if people get fed up with the Democrats' overreaching on spending, on health care 'reform', on bailoutmania, the Republicans could surprise people in 2010.
The Republicans have fertile ground to plow. The public is already dubious of a government-run health insurance plan, the core of Obama-Care. And there's plenty more for Republicans to focus on, including the threat of a government panel that decides which medical practices are covered and which are ostracized. Defeating ObamaCare, given Democratic majorities on Capitol Hill, may be difficult but it's not an impossibility. If Republicans lead the charge, health care providers and consumers are likely to join the active opposition. Otherwise, they'll remain passive.If health care providers have a trustworthy ally in the fight, it's quite possible to get enough senators nervous about the political fallout if they vote for universal health care. All it takes is for a group of DLC type of senators to vote with Republicans to not include health care reform in the reconcilliation process. Once it takes 60 votes to pass, the dynamics shift dramatically.
The more fight the GOP shows on President Obama's health care initiative, the more political capital President Obama expends in a losing effort. That makes President Obama more vulnerable. It figues that Democrats are weakest when President Obama is weak.
The bottom line is that Republicans aren't in nearly as desperate straits as the media is suggesting. The media is either running interference for the Democrats or they simply haven't noticed the Democrats' vulnerabilities.
Finally, the more Republicans fight, the more willing people become to contribute to their cause, further strengthening their hand. With so much to gain and practically nothing to lose, the GOP should go for the gold.
Posted Sunday, May 10, 2009 9:00 AM
Comment 1 by UNRR at 11-May-09 05:00 AM
This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 5/11/2009, at The Unreligious Right
Seat-Of-The-Pants Taxation
Last week's legislative highlight was watching the DFL infighting on tax increases . It's gotten so bad that two of the DFL's chairmen, Sen. Tom Bakk AND Rep. Gene Pelowski , have made Ann Lenczewski their punching bag on taxes. In fact, the DFL's conference committee hearings (there's only 1 Republican on the conference committee) failed to reach consensus on the DFL's Tax Increase Bill.
As a result of the DFL's infighting, they were forced to take the step of rewriting the Tax Increase Bill from scratch, passing it through the House and Senate, then have Gov. Pawlenty veto it before he headed out for the Annual Governor's Walleye Opener on White Bear Lake.
What's worse is that the DFL hasn't shown any inclination towards finding cost savings. There's no denying that they've figured out cuts but that's a different story. Cutting budgets just means that you're cutting spending and services. Finding cost savings means that you're cutting spending but keeping service levels the same. Another word for finding cost savings is reforms.
The DFL's mindset is illustrated perfectly by Speaker Kelliher :
She said the Governor's inflexibility on the tax issue was out of step with reality. "We're cutting spending more deeply than the Governor is but it's still isn't enough," Kelliher explained, "If Governor Pawlenty does not want to become known as the permanent deficit governor we need to have ongoing revenue in this budget."Speaker Kelliher, I'll repeat the questions I asked you and Sen. Pogemiller in February:
There are several reasons why I'm highlighting these per diem payments, the most important of which is to ask these questions:We know from the governor's log that only 9 bills were signed in the first four months of the session. That's a tiny amount of legislation becoming law considering all the out-of-session per diem that was paid.
- What work product did these DFL legislators produce during these hearings and meetings?
- Did the DFL give a high priority to gathering important budgetary information during these meetings?
- Did the DFL give a high priority to finding solutions to the budget deficit? If the DFL didn't put a high priority on that, why didn't they?
This Strib article says everything that needs to be said about how the DFL is putting these omnibus bills together:
Faced with a certain veto of their major tax bills and little agreement among themselves, House and Senate DFL leaders took opponents by surprise on Thursday evening with a brand-new bill that may raise $1 billion from a combination of taxes on cigarettes, alcohol and lofty incomes.This isn't leadership. It's essentially the state level equivalent of what the US House and Senate did in passing the stimulus bill. That bill hid the details. This bill hid the details during debate, too.
No one knows for sure how much the bill would raise or where it would come from, because the bill itself had only blank spaces where the numbers should go. "I've never seen anything like this," marveled House Minority Leader Marty Seifert, moments after the bill passed the Senate. "It has all blanks in it."
What's worse is that the DFL hasn't corrected the mistake they created in 2008 on the Green Acres program. That, too, was created by writing legislation in the dark of night in the waning hours of the session. Sounds familiar, doesn' it?
That's what happens when the legislature is led by people who are more interested in winning political victories than in doing what's right.
Posted Monday, May 11, 2009 1:42 AM
No comments.
The DFL's Tax Insanity Continues
The DFL's conference committee rewrite of their Tax Increase Bill isn't going well. Saying that it's hit a few bumps in the road is understatement. One of the earliest major bumps in the road have been provided by Rep. Gene Pelowski, DFL-Winona:
Pelowski said lawmakers won't have enough votes to override a Pawlenty veto of a DFL tax plan, and said the proposals are a fiction that will force lawmakers to scramble to craft another budget proposal after Pawlenty's veto. "We have to do what is real and not go through an exercise of what-ifs," Pelowski said. "There are no what-ifs. There is only the stark reality of this budget deficit."
After reading that quote, I figured Rep. Pelowski would quickly be brought back in line with the DFL's tax increase plans. If this Winona Daily News article is an indicator, that hasn't happened:
Pelowski questioned why DFL leaders spent months drafting separate tax bills in the House and Senate, scrapped parts of them late Thursday in conference committee and devised a largely new proposal by Friday.
"I would hope we would not have resorted to something like this," Pelowski said. " If it's serious, then it should have been done months ago."
Rep. Pelowski saying that a serious proposal should've been done months ago stings. The DFL can't criticize Gov. Pawlenty or the GOP legislature for a DFL legislator, and a committee chairman at that, for speaking his mind.
I've pointed out numerous times that the DFL legislature collected thousands of dollars in out-of-session, tax-free per diem. Had these hearings been used to figure out and publish a coherent set of priorities and the policies to achieve their priorities, the expense could've been justified. Had these out-of-session hearings been used to identify cost savings or eliminate non-essential programs, the DFL might've had something to justify the costs incurred by those hearings.
It's obvious that the DFL doesn't have any justification for those out-of-session hearings because they didn't accomplish anthing meaningful. They didn't produce a DFL budget proposal. They didn't establish a list of priorities. As a result, they're scrambling at the end.
Another reason why the DFL is scrambling is because they refused to publish their tax policies until late in the session. I noted early this session that the DFL's Cherrypicked Testimony Tour was all show. Before the session started, the DFL knew that they were going to try raising taxes. They withheld that information from us because they wanted to use their Cherrypicked Testimony Tour to rip Gov. Pawlenty's budget proposal.
The other reason why they didn't publish their plans early is because they didn't want to get criticized for their tax increases. It's certainly their right to do things that way. It's just that that tactic usually comes back to bite the DFL's collective backsides late in the session.
Finally, I want to recognize the political will it took for Rep. Pelowski for stating what he believes and voting the way of his beliefs. I expect to hear that the DFL leadership will put alot of pressure on Rep. Pelowski to change his vote. I can't imagine that it's easy to go against the people you consider your colleagues.
In my book, Rep. Pelowski is a profile in courage on this issue. He should be applauded for that.
Originally posted Monday, May 11, 2009, revised 30-Jan 3:43 PM
No comments.
What Priorities?
Rep. Steve Gottwalt just sent out an e-letter update talking about the budget. Here's the text of Rep. Gottwalt's e-letter:
Unfortunate game-playing by the Democrats in control of the legislature appears likely to fulfill predictions of a special session. The Democrats have more or less wasted five months to end-up where we thought they would: Offering the false choice between heavy tax increases or deep cuts to people in need.Rep. Gottwalt should be applauded for his work in the legislature. He's consistently talked about the need for first establishing a solid set of budget priorities. Steve was one of the first legislators to sign the "Live Within Our Means Pledge," too.
There is a third option that they have yet to seriously consider. House Republicans have offered many workable proposals that would save the state billions of dollars while preserving jobs and essential programs and services. Instead, Democrats favor playing political "gottcha" games.
Friday evening's "instant tax bill" debate was classic, with Democrats saying big tax increases won't hurt Minnesota businesses and job creators, and Republicans reminding them such increases will kill jobs we need to jump start our economy. It's also amazing to me that the Democrats could say, with straight faces, that they have made "tough cuts." What cuts?
Health and Human Services spending is set to grow $2 billion this biennium. The Democrats propose reducing that increase to $1.6 billion, and call that a "cut." They've proven they can't lead, reform, set good priorities, or balance a budget without heaping more tax burden on one of the highest tax states in the nation.
And I refuse to take any per diem payments if we end up in a special session. The taxpayers shouldn't suffer because Democrats could not get their work done on time.
Steve isn't alone in saying that the "Democrats have more or less wasted five months " before finishing the session running around like a chicken with its head cut off:
"I would hope we would not have resorted to something like this," Pelowski said. " If it's serious, then it should have been done months ago. If it isn't, then it's just gamesmanship."Rep. Pelowski is absolutely right. The DFL knew that they'd be raising taxes. Instead of having the political courage to defend their proposal. The DFL knew that their tax increases weren't popular so they hid them until the last possible minute. Now they're paying the price for their decision.
I'd add this to Steve's statement: It isn't just that the DFL wasted this session to end where they always end up: negotiating for a big tax increase. It's that they wasted alot of committee hearings last summer, too.
Finally, Steve should be applauded for announcing that he wouldn't accept per diem if a special session is needed. That announcement didn't surprise me because Steve is a public servant in every sense of the word. Personally, I wish we had more public servants. They in too short of supply.
Posted Monday, May 11, 2009 12:18 PM
No comments.
DFL Lobbying Rally Today
This Strib article says that pro tax groups are planning a rally today at the Capitol Rotunda today. This isn't as much a rally as it's getting the lobbyists together for a last-ditch lobbying effort. Here's the scoop on their tax rally:
The Invest in Minnesota group planned a noon rally at the state Capitol rotunda, in which members plan to call for "fair revenue raising." "Legislators need to hear that their constituents want fair taxes to be part of the solution in order to adequately fund services," according to the group's flyer.At this point, DFL disarray makes overriding Gov. Pawlenty's veto of the Tax Increase Bill difficult, if not impossible. That's why I suspect the importance of this rally is to pressure wobbly Democrats to support the override. I suspect that Rep. Pelowski will be their biggest target. Here's why I think that:
That position places the organization firmly on the side of the DFL, which has proposed a raft of tax increases as part of the solution for the state's budget crisis. It also places them firmly against Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who is adamantly opposed to tax increases and has already vetoed a $1 billion tax hike plan sent to him at the end of last week.
At the end of the rally, members of Invest in Minnesota plan to attempt to buttonhole legislators to advance a pro-tax message.In other words, the rally is for public consumption. The lobbying efforts are what's important. I'm betting that the DFL leadership is setting up a Plan B option. I'll bet that Plan B opts for no new taxes and spending cuts that the DFL will characterize as draconian in nature.
The reason why I think that is because of Tarryl's push-polling from a couple weeks ago. Here's two questions from her push-poll:
Cut Health and Human Services -- choose oneThe reason why they put last week's last-ditch Tax Increase Bill together was to stave off cutting education. It's worth noting that Gov. Pawlenty isn't planning on cutting the HHS budget; he's proposing cutting the rate of growth to the HHS budget.
A 10% cut will result in at least 113,000 people losing health insurance, hospitals getting a 3% cut in rates, nursing homes being cut, the potential loss of 10,610 health-care related jobs, and in-home services for 10,000 seniors and disabled individuals being eliminated.
0% = $0 saved
10% = $959 million saved
20% = $1.92 billion saved
30% = $2.88 billion saved
Cut Education -- choose one
A 10% cut could potentially lead to a substantial increase in local levies and increased class sizes.
0% = $0 saved
10% = $1.38 billion saved
20% = $2.76 billion saved
30% = $4.14 billion saved
That's why it's disingenuous for Tarryl to talk about a 10 percent cut in the HHS budget. If she read Gov. Pawlenty's bill, she'd know that the HHS budget isn't being cut.
I wouldn't be surprised to find out that there were a sizable number of people show up for this rally. I wouldn't be surprised if most of the people who attend are people whose budgets rely on government funding. Still, today's rally won't come close to the size or passion of the Tax Day Tea Party.
Posted Monday, May 11, 2009 3:09 PM
No comments.
