May 14-16, 2009
May 14 02:30 Tarryl's False Choice Survey Returns May 14 08:35 Conventional Stupidity....er...Wisdom May 14 12:49 Like Moderation Worked SO WELL Last Time May 14 14:53 Pelosi Accuses CIA Of Lying to Her May 14 15:53 St. Cloud Townhall Meeting May 14 16:19 ***BEAKING NEWS*** May 15 03:48 DFL's Fine Whine Tour Taking Shape May 16 08:29 National Energy Tax Conference Call Notes May 16 22:38 DFL Hysteria Running Rampant?
Tarryl's False Choice Survey Returns
Tarryl Clark's push-polling survey has appeared again. I wish I could say I'm surprised but I'm not. Here's a reminder of Tarryl's last push-polling survey:
2. Cut Health and Human ServicesDisgusted with Tarryl's false choice survey, I sent her this reply:
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
The poll you've put together is closer to push-polling than it is about finding out people's opinions. Why didn't you include an option called other? Why didn't you include questions about doing things differently that don't involve cutting spending & services? Is everything that the state does the most efficient way of doing things? Draconian cuts vs. tax increases is the type of strawman argument that President Obama specializes in. It isn't reality.The DFL has worked hard to tell people that the only choice is a false choice. The DFL hasn't looked into doing things differently. They haven't learned St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis's system of prioritization. Mayor Kleis has 3 categoties for spending money: Do's, Don'ts & Do Differentlies. The DFL criteria is substantially different. Their guidelines don't seem to include the do differently category.
Here's another portion of Tarryl's e-letter update that I find questionable:
Recent polls show Minnesotans understand the need for a long-term, balanced approach of spending cuts, one-time federal dollars, and revenue increases. That's what the Senate proposed from the start. It's the common-sense solution that will help prevent hospitals from closing, retain health insurance for working families, and keep our streets safe by funding public safety.First, why didn't Tarryl include the names of some of these polls? I don't trust polling these days except for KSTP's poll done by SurveyUSA or national polls from Rasmussen. It's too easy to rig polls. Second, how many of the people allegedly polled knew that the DFL legislature didn't bother looking for cost savings before thinking about raising taxes? Third, would the people who allegedly took these polls give the same answers if they knew that DFL legislators from the House and Senate couldn't even agree on taxes? The Senate started with a $2.2 billion tax increase; the House with a $!.5 billion tax increase. The bill emerging from the conference committee dropped to just under $1 billion. Will the DFL next shift to a $250,000,000 tax increase using regresesive tax increases?
Wednesday afternoon, I spoke with a person familiar with the budget negotiations. I told this person that "prioritization is the longest 4-letter word in the DFL's dictionary." This person got a chuckle from that, then replied by saying that the DFL's definition of prioritizing was whether to grant the entire wish list from one of their special interest groups or another.
I find this paragraph from tarryl's e-letter objectionable:
Several of the budget bills were negotiated with, and sent to, the Executive Branch. A few of the larger bills will be out of conference committee tonight. The biggest differences remain in the area of health care, where the Governor wants to take away health insurance coverage for 113,000 Minnesotans, raid the dedicated Health Care Access Fund (HCAF), and make deep cuts to hospitals that are already struggling to stay open.I won't bother being statesmanlike with Tarryl's statement because Tarryl's statement isn't based in reality. Here's what Rep. Steve Gotttwalt wrote in his most recent e-letter update :
Speaker Kelliher's comments simply underscore the only game plan the DFL has brought all session: The false choice between massive tax increases, and deep cuts to essential programs and services. She and her cohorts are trying to scare Minnesotans into falling for huge tax increases! They have ignored and disregarded the third option of setting good priorities, making reasonable cuts, and using real reforms to do a better job while saving the state money, living within our means instead of raising taxes.Steve offered legislation that would've saved money from MinnesotaCare, which could've been used to stabilize state payment to hospitals, nursing homes or long term care providers. Just because the DFL ignored these legislation-improving amendments doesn't mean the GOP didn't offer them.
Republicans have offered numerous proposals that would save Minnesota more than $5 billion without raising taxes and without cutting hospitals, nursing homes and long term care providers.
Posted Thursday, May 14, 2009 4:08 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 14-May-09 07:44 AM
The counter-argument needs to be as dirt-simple and emotional as the DFL's is, but with the benefit of being the truth. Here it is: Is it reasonable for the State to increase its spending (and taxing) by ten percent per year, every year, for the last twenty, AND this year, in a down economy? Did YOU get a 10% raise this year?
Conventional Stupidity....er...Wisdom
David Schultz and other liberals are trotting out the 'national ambitions, no-new-taxes pledge' garbage again in their attacks on Gov. Pawlenty . It hasn't dawned on these critics that Gov. Pawlenty has vetoed the DFL's tax increases because the revenues aren't needed. Here's their latest criticism of Gov. Pawlenty:
"There's no question that he's under a lot of pressure," said David Schultz, a political observer and business professor at Hamline University in St. Paul. "Clearly I suspect that any decision of his to go along with taxes would doom him nationally." Detractors of the governor say he's more interested in running for president in 2012 than the interests of lower-income Minnesotans.The DFL's ad campaign isn't working because people are figuring it out that the DFL never looks for cost savings, never thinks of reforms and never prioritizes spending.
Ironically, Pawlenty's adherence to the Taxpayers League of Minnesota's no-new-taxes pledge he signed in 2002 comes at a time when, politically, he could safely compromise on that controversial issue without endangering himself politically.
"This is unusual," Schultz said. "You're reaching the situation where a lot of these groups are looking at the tradeoffs." Schultz contrasted Pawlenty's continued no-new-taxes posturing with the style of former Gov. Arne Carlson, who was more comfortable with compromise and governing from the middle.
Steve Gottwalt's response to a liberal constituent is a good assist in debunking the DFL's myth-making machine. Here's a key portion of Steve's reply:
Fortunately for Minnesotans, we have a governor who understands we cannot keep growing government at its current unsustainable rate, especially at a time when our economy is struggling and our state budget is in deep deficit. He also understands that what we have is not a revenue problem; it's a spending problem. We also have a governor who seeks real reform so we start getting more for the dollars we already spend. It has nothing to do with national politics, and I fully expect Tim Pawlenty will run for a third term as Minnesota's governor.Steve's defense of Gov. Pawlenty is spot on. The DFL's reflexive answer for every economic situation is raising taxes, whether we're running a huge surplus or trying to get out of a deficit. With the DFL, there's never any questioning whether the spending that we're doing is a need or want. With the DFL, there's no questioning whether the way we're delivering services is the most efficient way to deliver services.
On the other hand, we have a majority in charge of our legislature that has proven itself incapable of setting good priorities and living within its means, and incapable of working bi-partisanly for real reforms. As Minnesota families and businesses struggle to balance their own budgets, the majority heaps more tax burden on them. Instead of adopting fiscally sound proposals that could balance our budget without deep cuts or tax increases, they add more government at greater expense and fewer results.
In other words, it's the same old, same old status quo answers from the DFL that's driving Minnesota's economy into the ground, not Gov. Pawlenty's vetoing unneeded tax increases.
Posted Thursday, May 14, 2009 8:35 AM
No comments.
Like Moderation Worked SO WELL Last Time
This Strib article reads like a press release for another 'moderate' Republican group. Its thinking is as predictable as it is flawed. Here's just one of its ad hominem attacks that's as rooted in reality as Grimm's Fairy Tales:
"Look for the Club for Growth to oppose Simmons...Castle and (Florida Gov. Charlie) Crist in favor of ideologues who can't win," the REP said. "Such political narcissism may make the purists feel good about themselves, but it is not a sound basis for building an electoral coalition that can win again in what is still a center-right country."First, it's important to note that the GOP's running of spineless moderates have contributed to blowouts the last 2 election cycles. It's laughable to take their advice seriously, especially with that historical perspective. Second, it's absurd to think that Charlie Crist is the GOP's savior, especially considering Marco Rubio is a charismatic, eloquent true conservative whereas Crist might be to the left of Linc Chaffee.
There's a line from the movie Roadhouse that should be applied to the Crist-Rubio matchup. Red, the auto parts store owner, tells Swayze's character to "never marry an ugly woman. They take all your strength." The application to politics is that we shouldn't run candidates that people aren't excited about.
During last year's primary season, article after article spoke about the Democrats' enthusiasm gap. Running a lefty like Crist will sap the activists' enthusiasm quickly and thoroughly.
Let's think of this, too. The energy provided through the tea parties was powerful. Those attending the tea parties are ready for revolution. To run a candidate like Charlie Crist is telling the activists "Start the revolution without me." Gladly.
It's informative to compare and contrast the 2004 election with the 2006 and 2008 election disasters. In 2004, Karl Rove made certain that the base had lots of things to be excited about. He made sure picking strict constructionist judges was a central theme of the campaign. Tax cuts were another central theme of the campaign, too. Volunteers showed up in droves. I recall reading articles that the Ohio GOP being so overstocked with volunteers that they sent their excess volunteers to Pennsylvania to maximize their efforts in that state.
We experienced volunteer shortages in 2006 and 2008, mostly because we ran away from the base of the party.
REP advocates new ideas based on well-established conservative principles, such as conservation of the nation's natural resources, and urges the GOP to recall that Reagan accomodated a range of Republican thinking.I won't pay attention to that sentence because it's 100% BS. Reagan was a believer in the big tent but saying that conservation was part of Reagan's agenda is absurd. One of the first things Reagan did after the inauguration was to end the greencapping of oil wells. He dramatically increased domestic production, too.
The tone of the article had the feel of a press release from this obscure organization. That's what you get from the Agenda Media these days. Unfortunately, it's what we get from the NRSC, too.
Posted Thursday, May 14, 2009 12:53 PM
No comments.
Pelosi Accuses CIA Of Lying to Her
In a stunning development, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has accused the CIA of lying to her and "misleading the Congress of the United States." In fact, she's practically dared the CIA to leak more information about the briefings. I suspect that's gonna hurt her in the near future.
Asked whether she was accusing the CIA of lying to her during a 2002 briefing on the use of so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques," Pelosi said: "Yes, misleading the Congress of the United States, misleading the Congress of the United States. I am."Speaker Pelosi is using the CIA as a weapon to drag the Bush administration into this. Unfortunately for Ms. Pelosi, she's made too many conflicting statements to be credible. She started off by saying she hadn't been briefed, then switched her story to say that she'd been briefed that waterboarding was legal but it wasn't being used before saying that Jane Harman was writing a letter expressing concerns with the legality of waterboarding to now saying that the CIA mislead her and Congress.
She went on to call on the CIA to release the details of briefings they provided to Congress and for the creation of a truth commission to "determine how intelligence was misused and how controversial and possibly illegal activities like torture were authorized within the executive branch."
Ed nails it with this commentary:
More to the point, people who attended the same and similar briefings in that period have already acknowledged publicly that the CIA told them explicitly of their use. Some briefings included videotapes of the interrogations, which have been destroyed and created their own scandal on Capitol Hill and Langley.It isn't difficult to not trust Ms. Pelosi at this point. Her statements have been proven false from so many different directions that it's impossible to keep track of all the ways.
Rather than go through all the different melodramas created by Ms. Pelosi's varying stories, I'll just simplify it to this: Speaker Pelosi was caught lying. Instead of admitting she lied, she concocted more lies which have gotten her into deeper trouble.
In short, Ms. Pelosi hasn't figured out that the first rule of holes is to stop digging.
Let the leak wars begin.
Posted Thursday, May 14, 2009 2:57 PM
Comment 1 by Reaganite Republican Resistance at 14-May-09 05:10 PM
Obama really kicked an ant hill with his ill-advised and politically motivated release of Bush Administration memos regarding EITs- I'm sure he already regrets it.
So, let's have a hearing and get it all out there, shall we? Then watch the rats scatter who attacked Bush for protecting the country from terrorist attack, but who clearly knew what was going on five years before we heard a peep out of them
Comment 2 by Walter Hanson at 14-May-09 06:20 PM
I've heard news stories some democrat lawmaker asked was this tough enough. Was that Pelosi?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by eric z at 15-May-09 10:10 AM
With Pelosi being from California, they could have said waterboarding and she was thinking nostalgically of surfboarding, a slight mental lapse because back in her youth they made them out of wood, the boards, and she recalled that she had friends who owned a woody for transporting their waterboards to the beach. She might have envisioned no problem letting detainees and interrogators do some boarding together if the surf's up with no treacherous undertow.
Seriously, Gary, I think what she indicated she wanted was actual footage and transcripts; and if they have none it comes down to a swearing contest of he said, she said, and that can be as hard to pin down as Norm Coleman's dealings with Nasser Kazeminy.
Comment 4 by eric z at 15-May-09 10:39 AM
Gary, the question really is - it was done, and should it have been?
All else, including what Pelosi knew when, is outside of the basic question - who authorized it, who ordered it be done. If she gets thrown under a bus over it, it would be deserved if she in fact was complicit. Torture is torture regardless of what Pelosi knew when.
You and Rove,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124226863721018193.html
are simply dabbling in misdirection from the core issue.
Moreover, neither you nor Rover are saying Pelosi ORDERED it, are you?
SO --- Who was behind it being done apparently multiple times daily to certain detainees?
Who gave the orders?
Pin that down first and later worry about who knew what when, etc.
And as to who knew and did what when --- If McChrystal was big in that chain of command, I suggest you should quite properly be questioning Obama's support for putting him in charge in Afghanistan.
The McChrystal appointment needs scrutiny - beyond the Tillman family's questioning. What was JSOC doing under McChrystal when, and who gave McChrystal his marching orders, then, at that time, telling him to do what, and leaving what else to his discretionary command.
Ask the right questions, don't misdirect attention.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 15-May-09 10:58 AM
5.Gary, the question really is - it was done, and should it have been?The answer to that question is an unequivocal yes. In fact, I'd argue that the Constitution mandates it when it gives the commander-in-chief the affirmative responsibility of protecting the United State from all enemies.
Several CIA directors testified that EITs prevented several terrorist attacks, including an attack on the tallest building in LA, the collapse of an important bridge in New York City & the capture of the Lackawanna Six terror cell. These DCI's also testified that 'conventional methods' weren't working so they asked for a DoJ ruling on whether EITs could be employed.
Pelosi's lies have nothing to do with the issue of EITs. Ms. Pelosi started this by criticizing EITs. Then-Rep. Porter Goss told the media that he & Pelosi were briefed together & that they asked whether they were doing enough.
The media properly asked Ms. Pelosi about it & she started changing her story on a seemingly daily basis.
The 'distraction' as you call it started with Ms. Pelosi telling a series of conflicting stories.
It isn't my fault or Mr. Rove's if Ms. Pelosi can't tell the truth.
Comment 6 by eric z at 15-May-09 11:40 AM
We disagree, and the JAG corps lawyers reportedly briefing the Camp Nama - Task Force 121 special ops people
http://www.esquire.com/features/ESQ0806TERROR_102?click=main_sr
and the Bush Whitehouse lawyers splitting hairs over the Geneva Accords was obscene obfuscation over the civilized world not condoning torture and uncivilized elements within and outside of it using torture nonetheless.
On Pelosi, besides the Rove link, helpful links suggesting she perhaps approvingly knew but in no event did she think, back then, to do the simple write-a-secret-letter CYA step as Harman promptly on taking over the senior Dem seat on the House Intell. Committee did.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/12/pelosi.waterboarding/
http://womensissues.about.com/b/2009/05/15/could-prior-knowledge-of-waterboarding-be-nancy-pelosis-waterloo.htm
http://womensissues.about.com/b/2007/12/09/cruel-and-unusual-pelosi-nancy-knew-about-waterboarding-since-2002.htm#gB3
http://civilliberty.about.com/b/2009/05/14/nancy-pelosi-torture-and-culpability.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664.html?hpid=topnews&sub=AR
So whether she splits hairs and rewrites history somewhat, she appears to have been told enough to then have registered some official negative response had she then so intended.
And there was Porter Goss and the Goslings when he got to the CIA destroying the interrogation tapes, a separate story you do not explicitly mention, condemn, or condone.
If they saw nothing wrong, why screw with the evidence on record???
You appear to take the Cheney-Limbaugh position, rather than the McCain-Paul position over these things - Paul does not see any Constitutional torture imperative; or do you assert he does?
The MSNBC crowd last night argued that it all traces back to Cheney, and wanting to manufacture the nonexistent tie between al Quaida and Saddam; and if Cambone's been out of that loop it would truly surprise me immensely. Thus they argued that getting reliable information via such means was not the objective, but expediently getting politically useful false statements was. Any thoughts?
Response 6.1 by Gary Gross at 15-May-09 04:27 PM
1) There was a tenuous link between Osama & Saddam, which Stephen Hayes documents in his book, but nobody has suggested that Saddam was linked to the 9/11 attacks.
2) I haven't read enough on the interrogation tapes to know much about it.
3) Ron Paul is mistaken in his beliefs & McCain's position is understandable & wrong. The Constitution gives the commander-in-chief the affirmative responsibility of protecting our nation from its enemies. That means, in a very literal sense, that it's imperative that the commander-in-chief use everything in his/her power to protect the United States from its enemies.
I'd further argue that there's a moral imperative that they protect thousands from attacks. Imagine having the tallest building in LA toppled during the busiest time of the day. Imagine, instead, that the busiest bridge in NYC being destroyed.
EITs prevented those things from happening & yes, we know that the regular interrogation techniques didn't work. We know this because former CIA directors testified to that under oath.
St. Cloud Townhall Meeting
Last night, I attended Mayor Kleis's weekly get together with St. Cloudites, mostly because last night's meeting involved an issue relating to a park in my neighborhood. Because of St. Cloud's declining revenues, the St. Cloud Park & Rec Department was tasked with the job of cutting spending. Their recommendation to the City Council was to shut 4 of the 7 city parks, including a wading pool a couple blocks from my home.
A number of young families attended with their children. They asked Mayor Kleis if there was a way to keep the pool open. Mayor Kleis then said that there was a way, mentioning that families living near Hester Park by the St. Cloud Hospital are raising money to pay for the expenses of keeping the park open.
First, Mayor Kleis said that the City of St. Cloud wouldn't permanently shut down any park. He then said that the pools had to be staffed but that they didn't need lifeguards. Mayor Kleis said that the person watching at the pool did have to be CPR certified & that these people would be 'hired' as volunteers so that St. Cloud's liability insurance would cover them.
Secondly, the familes from the neighborhood were given the contact information for the man, Scott Zlotnik, so that families could find out the dollar amount for keeping the parks open.
Mayor Kleis also talked about an upcoming event with a delegation from Spalt, Germany. Spalt is St. Cloud's sister city. The event will be held Monday, June 1 at 10:00 am. At the event, a new sign will be unveiled honoring Spalt as our sister city. Spalt will be celebrating its 1,200th birthday next year.
The neighborhood families attending the meeting were justifiably upset because of the pool's closing but their attitude changed when they were told how they could keep the pool open. Their attitude changed to one of 'Let's accept this challenge' in short order.
After the meeting ended, I spoke with Mayor Kleis about the legislature's final week of the regular session. Like most city officials across the state, Mayor Kles said that the legislature had alot of work to finish in a short amount of time before saying that he's hoping for the best.
Posted Thursday, May 14, 2009 3:53 PM
No comments.
***BEAKING NEWS***
This just in from an e-letter update from Rep. Steve Gottwalt:
Dear Neighbor:This is huge news!!! Gov. Pawlenty's statement likely has caused a full-scale Pogie diatribe.
This afternoon, Governor Tim Pawlenty announced there will be no special session and no government shutdown. The 2009 session will definitely end Monday night at midnight. The governor has decided to take the bills the DFL majority has put on his desk, line-item veto in some places, and sign them. The DFL bills irresponsibly leave a gap of $3 billion, and the governor is in a position to unallot to cover the
gap, although he said he would prefer a negotiated solution with the DFL leadership. They now have a few days to do that.
We face a $6.4 billion budget deficit and the Constitution states we must balance our bottom line by July 1. But the legislative majority has failed to get the job done, so the governor's announcement today says he will do the hard work of erasing the deficit with or without DFL cooperation.
The following is Governor Pawlenty's news release. I will continue to provide updates as we close out the 2009 State Legislative Session:
NO SPECIAL SESSION, NO GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN -- GOVERNOR PAWLENTY SAYS HE WILL BALANCE STATE BUDGET
-Governor outlines plan to use executive action to balance budget, says his preference is to sign into law a negotiated budget agreement --
Saint Paul - At the State Capitol this afternoon, Governor Tim Pawlenty said, "Politics as usual around this place is over. The people of Minnesota expect and deserve timely and decisive action. I will not let the legislature's work spill over into a special session. We are not going to waste taxpayer money with a costly overtime or have a state government shutdown, especially in this economy. My preference would be for DFL legislators to work with me on a reasonable budget solution, but if they can't get that done I will take executive action to balance the budget."
"A key principle is that the DFL-controlled legislature shouldn't spend more money than the state has available," Governor Pawlenty said. "Unfortunately, they have done just that and now I'll fix it."
Over the past week, DFL majorities in the Minnesota House and Senate passed budget bills that leave a $3 billion shortfall between spending and revenues.
Governor Pawlenty announced today that he would use line-item vetoes during the upcoming period and his unallotment authority in July 2009 to bring the state budget into balance.
"Passing a balanced budget is the legislature's most fundamental job. Unfortunately, so far this year the DFL majority has failed to get the job done," Governor Pawlenty said. "In January, I outlined a balanced budget that prioritized important areas like public safety, military and veterans, and K-12 education. Now we're in the final
days of this legislative session and it's time to let the people of Minnesota know that this will be resolved. It should get done on time and I'm saying it will get done on time.
"If the DFL cannot balance this budget without reaching into Minnesotans' pockets and increasing our already uncompetitive taxes in ways that will kill job growth, I'm prepared to make the tough decisions they've avoided and take action to balance the budget. "
The Governor said final decisions have not been made regarding possible impacts to state programs, but areas could include subsidized health care programs, welfare, and other social services; K-12 and higher education; and local government aid. In addition, state employee layoffs could be used to save additional funds. In Wisconsin, Gov. Jim Doyle has said approximately 1,100 state employees could be laid off as part of their budget cutting measures, along with 16 furlough days over the next two years.
A compromise offer from Governor Pawlenty to DFL legislative leaders earlier this week incorporated a House DFL position (a larger K-12 education shift than proposed by the Governor), a Senate DFL position (no funds included for the budget reserve, the Governor proposed $250 million for the budget reserve) and a reduction in a proposal that the DFL indicated they didn't support (agreeing to use only half of the
tobacco appropriation bond funds). Even though the Governor was willing to move in their direction in all three areas, DFL leaders rejected the offer.
Governor Pawlenty has also compromised during this legislative session by showing a willingness to work with DFL legislators regarding their proposed fee increases for the courts system, their lower levels of funding for K-12 education and their lack of interest in the Governor's proposals to reduce business taxes to grow jobs and spur investment.
The Governor stated that he is unwilling to raise taxes on Minnesotans, especially as the state looks to grow jobs and recover from the economic recession. DFL legislators have proposed numerous tax increases this session, including:
~ New top income tax rate of 9 percent, which would be fourth-highest in the nation, including:
~ New top income tax rate of 9.25 percent
~ Across-the-board income tax increases
~ New sales tax on Internet downloads, including music
~ Elimination of the local property tax cap, enacted just last year
~ Higher taxes on beer, wine and alcohol
~ Higher taxes on cigarettes
~ Allowing counties to increase the sales tax by 0.5 percent
~ Eliminating home mortgage interest deduction
~ Eliminating deduction when a person donates an organ
~ Eliminating elderly or disabled income subtraction
~ Eliminating child and dependent care credit
~ Eliminating exemption for Minnesota state and municipal bonds interest income
~ Eliminating long-term care credit
"I'm willing to work with the DFL on a reasonable plan, but I'm not willing to let them squeeze more money out of taxpayers and further burden job creators and employers in the midst of the toughest economy in more than 60 years," Governor Pawlenty said. "One way or another, we will get the budget situation resolved, keeping taxpayers and families first in our minds."
Stay tuned to LFR for more details as they become available.
Posted Thursday, May 14, 2009 4:19 PM
Comment 1 by R-Five at 14-May-09 08:21 PM
First, thank you for your extensive coverage again this Session.
Second, this seems too easy, even for a Pogemiller vs Pawlenty mismatch. I think this what the Dems wanted, both to blame Pawlenty and avoid making and real decisions themselves.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 14-May-09 08:34 PM
R, This might've been what the DFL wanted but campaigning on the message of Pawlenty is evil because he wouldn't let us raise taxes isn't my idea of a positive, upbeat message.
Comment 3 by Walter Hanson at 15-May-09 08:17 AM
not to mention most people including those poor and middle class people which the DFL claim they care about understand the concept if you make a $1,000 every two weeks you can't spend $2,000 every two weeks without going into bankruptcy in the near future.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
DFL's Fine Whine Tour Taking Shape
Based on this post , I'd say it's safe to predict that the DFL Fine Whine Tour will be visiting St. Cloud next Tuesday. They've already started spinning Thursday's event:
In an interesting turn of events in the legislative session, Governor/King Pawlenty decided to fore go that whole legislature thing and those silly election things. He has taken it upon himself to elevate the nearly super minority Republican Party and his own plurality election victories to a position in which they, and only they, make decisions on how to solve the current budget crisis.There's a couple problems with this paragraph. Gov. Pawlenty didn't "forego that whole legislature thing and those silly election things." In fact, Gov. Pawlenty hasn't done anything...yet. Correct that: He's told the DFL-dominated legislature that he won't allow them to drag Minnesota into a special session. He's told them that he'll prevent the DFL from balancing the budget by "reaching into Minnesotans' pockets ."
Here's the DFL's official statement :
We may as well not have held an election in 2008. First, former senator Norm Coleman has deprived Minnesotans of their full representation in the United States Senate, refusing to concede that Al Franken got more votes and is entitled to the seat. Now, Coleman's crony Governor Tim Pawlenty has threatened to dispense with the elected Legislature, and run the state's finances in the middle of a historic economic and fiscal crisis using only his executive powers of line-item veto and unallotment. Next week, after the Legislature adjourns its regular session, Minnesotans may wake up in the closest thing that America has had to a monarchy in 233 years.Here's the line that I got the most laughs from:
Good government requires artful negotiation and compromise among elected leaders with differing views. The Founders of the nation and of our state understood the need for checks and balances so that no individual could impose his or her views on everyone else except through the democratic process. Yet Governor Pawlenty, with support from a narrow minority in the Minnesota House, is willing to ignore the constitutional process and nullify the last election if the Legislature won't cave in to his demands.
Governor Pawlenty is not acting like a leader in a constitutional democracy. The DFL-led Legislature is delivering on their campaign promise of fiscal accountability, and has delivered a budget that makes tough but fair choices in tough times. Legislative leaders held listening sessions across Minnesota and took the people's views into account in fashioning that budget. But Governor Pawlenty has walled himself away, barely deigning to meet even with the people's elected representatives, let alone hear the people themselves. Governor Pawlenty is acting more like a monarch than an elected leader.
I'm extremely disappointed with the direction that Governor Pawlenty has taken the budget negotiations by his comments today. The legislative leadership in both houses have been more than willing to compromise with him in recent weeks, even throwing out their own budgets in favor of a working solution.
If there was any doubt, Tim Pawlenty made one thing very clear today. He has every intention of putting his own national ambitions before the best interests of the people of Minnesota. Instead of a balanced approach, Pawlenty wants to borrow, shift and cut so deeply that thousands of private-sector jobs, mostly in Minnesota's health-care industry, will be lost. And he plans to cut 113,000 Minnesotans from health-care coverage. These plans do not reflect Minnesota values, nor do they achieve acceptable outcomes.
Minnesotans want a balanced approach to a balanced budget. They expect their elected leaders to put their future careers and egos aside to get things done. Instead, today they found their governor resorting to petty name-calling and childish foot-stomping, on top of attempts to ignore the constitutional process.
Once again, Tim Pawlenty has proven he is not the leader Minnesotans expect and deserve."
The Founders of the nation and of our state understood the need for checks and balances so that no individual could impose his or her views on everyone else except through the democratic process.A fine whine it is that Mr. Melendez is serving. It's also BS. Governors can't appropriate money for anything. The legislature passed all of the spending bills, then sent them to Gov. Pawlenty's desk. When the DFL sent Gov. Pawlenty a set of bills that wouldn't balance without a major tax increase, they hoped that Gov. Pawlenty would veto the bills. That way, they could force a special session, possibly even a government shutdown with the hopes of damaging him for the next election.
Rather than allowing himself to be painted into a corner, Gov. Pawlenty used his line-item veto authority granted by the Minnesota Constitution :
If a bill presented to the governor contains several items of appropriation of money, he may veto one or more of the items while approving the bill. At the time he signs the bill the governor shall append to it a statement of the items he vetoes and the vetoed items shall not take effect.The DFL's whining about the lack of checks and balances doesn't ring true. It's just that the DFL doesn't like how Gov. Pawlenty and the house GOP prevented the legislature from doing whatever it wanted to do.
Here's another statement that's total BS:
Legislative leaders held listening sessions across Minnesota and took the people's views into account in fashioning that budget.Mr. Melendez must hope that people would forget about the DFL's attempt to manipulate the testimony :
From: Gene Pelowski [mailto:Rep.Gene.Pelowski@house.mn]TRANSLATION: Stack the testimony with activists who will tell the attentive legislators that they should have the "courage to raise taxes" so their program won't get cut.
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:13 AM
This Friday, February 20, there will be a bicameral hearing held in our region. Senators and Representatives from both political parties will be in Winona from 3:30 to 5:30 PM, Winona City Hall, 207 Lafayette St. The purpose of this hearing is to get testimony from affected programs in every level of government, education, health care or service impacted by the cuts suggested by the Governor's state budget.
I am writing you to ask that you or a designee get scheduled to testify. You may do this by going to the House website at www.house.mn and clicking on "Town Meetings".
We would ask you to focus your comments on the impact of the Governor's budget including what is the harm to your area of government or program. Please be as precise as possible using facts such as number of lay offs, increases in property taxes, cuts in services, increases in tuition, elimination of programs . To be respectful of the time necessary to hear from a large number of constituents it would be advised to use no more than 3-5 minutes to convey your message. If you choose to provide handouts or printed materials, please plan to bring approximately 25 copies, enough for committee members and media.
Sincerely,
Representative Gene Pelowski
District 31A
Rep. Pelowski's wasn't the only email sent instructing the activists to manipulate the testimony :
Dear Reps. Benson, Ruud, Winkler, Peterson and Simon and Sens. Bonoff, Rest and Pappas,This is the sentence that's the biggest pile of BS:
Thank you for participating in the Plymouth town hall meeting this Thursday. I anticipate there will be additional members participating but have so far not yet been notified. Meeting details are listed below and directions from the Capitol are attached.
Plymouth Town Hall Meeting
Thursday, Feb. 26 7:00 pm
Plymouth City Hall
3400 Plymouth Blvd.
I have also attached the list of people who have signed up to testify as of 9 a.m. this morning. Because we will be meeting for approximately 2 hrs., we will not be able to hear from everyone. (140 have submitted their names.) We will be limiting testimony to 2 minutes and encouraging individuals to submit their comments in writing or online. If there are any individuals listed who you think would provide particularly compelling testimony, please let me know. We will be working to hear from a variety of individuals covering a wide range of topics.
Please contact me with any additional questions or suggestions.
The DFL-led Legislature is delivering on their campaign promise of fiscal accountability, and has delivered a budget that makes tough but fair choices in tough times.The DFL's budget is irresponsible because it originally included a major job-killing tax increase. The DFL's Tax Increase Bill was so awful that it barely passed in veto-proof Senate . It's so awful that Rep. Gene Pelowski wrote an op-ed criticizing the DFL's bill.
The narrow minority that Mr. Melendez talked about earlier wasn't that minor in the 36-30 vote in the Senate. There are 48 DFL senators and 19 GOP senators. That means that at least 11 DFL senators voted against the DFL's irresponsible Tax Increase Bill.
This is the other sentence that I vehemently disagree with:
The legislative leadership in both houses have been more than willing to compromise with him in recent weeks.This Strib article suggests that Mr. Melendez' statement is as reliable as Nancy Pelosi's tortured version of the truth about EITs:
Pawlenty's new plan, offered Monday morning, would borrow just under $500 million against future state revenues instead of the nearly $1 billion he had originally proposed. It would adopt the Senate's proposal to drain $250 million from the state's reserve account and would fill in the remainder by acceding to the larger accounting shifts proposed by the House.The Lady Logician sums things up nicely in this post :
The proposal by Pawlenty steps around the cluster of tax increases passed by the House and Senate last week.
In a letter addressed to the Senate Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House, the Governor said that he would relent on his opposition to two of the three main sticking points between the the Legislature and the Governor's office and he would cut in half his request for bonding. In essense, he was giving in to the DFL on 2 1/2 of the 3 main issues that the DFL had with the Governor's budget. The DFL's response was quick and predictable. Calling it a "false compromise" and a compromise in "word and not in deed" the DFL leadership of the House and the Senated doubled down on their intent to once again drive the state toward a shut-down (as they did in 2005).The Strib's article suggests that the "legislative leadership in both houses" wasn't as "willing to compromise with [Gov. Pawlenty] in recent weeks" as Mr. Melendez suggests.
Then again, that's what I'd expect from a spinmeister like Mr. Melendez.
Posted Friday, May 15, 2009 3:48 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 15-May-09 08:35 AM
I appreciate the careful language and, indeed, it may be impolitic to call this statement what it is-- a pack of LIES. At this point, however, the DFL deserves what it gets. They have NOT made the hard choices, and deliberately sent bills to the Governor that did not balance the budget, CONTRARY to State law! Pawlenty decides to abide by the law, using what the legislature gave him. They laid a trap, then fell in it.
Way to go, Governor! Now, during the upcoming "whine tour," while the sky stays firmly in place, the DFL can continue their useless role in government.
Comment 2 by R-Five at 16-May-09 10:37 PM
Let's not also forget Melendez's support of Mark Richie, claiming things to be true that Richie himself had conceded were false. Melendez's personal assurances of anything are worthless.
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 16-May-09 10:44 PM
R, Check out my post about tonight's developments from St. Paul. It's just a little misdirection mixed in with enough fact.
National Energy Tax Conference Call Notes
Friday morning, I participated in a blogger conference call with Rep. John Kline. The subject for Friday's conference call was the National Energy Tax (the House GOP's nickname for the bill). In his opening statement, Rep. Kline said that an MIT study showed that the National Energy Tax bill would increase the average family's energy bill by $3,100 annually. Rep. Kline then said that the CBO figure was significantly smaller and that another reputable study said it would increase families' taxes by over $4,000.
When it was my turn to speak, I said that we're seeing gas prices going up again as driving season getting started and that it wouldn't surprise me to read about $3.00 a gallon gas before it's all over. I then asked if that shouldn't be used in the upcoming debate over this bill. Rep. Kline said that that should and will be included in the debate.
I then said that the Democrats' 'solution' was based alot on conserving energy. I said that conservation is important but that it doesn't work for young couples with little babies at home in the winter. They need to keep the thermostat turned up so that the baby stays warm.
Rep. Kline said that that was a good way of making things personal, which he said was important in fighting and defeating the National Energy Tax bill.
Rep. Kline said that the Democrats' so-called solution didn't include increasing supplies of fossil fuels or nuclear power. He said that, "with all due respect to Mr. Pickens", you can't build enough wind farms. I couldn't agree more.
I also mentioned that last year's House Oil Party brought about the American Energy Act, which is the embodiment of a true all-of-the-above energy reform bill. Rep. Kline said that much of what's in that bill will be part of the House Republicans' energy bill alternative.
OBSERVATION: The Democrats' energy policy is based on the belief that alternative energy sources can replace fossil fuels. Wind farms and solar panels are ok as limited options but they can't replace coal-fired power plants and fossil fuels for our cars.
It's time that the Democrats started saying no every once in awhile to their green allies. It's time they faced the reality that we need increased energy production.
Posted Saturday, May 16, 2009 8:29 AM
No comments.
DFL Hysteria Running Rampant?
The Strib ran this op-ed from Speaker Kelliher in this morning's paper. It suggests that the DFL is in disarray and resorting to scare tactics. Here's a portion of Speaker Kelliher's op-ed:
Gov. Tim Pawlenty has announced his intention to go it alone on balancing the state budget if an agreement satisfactory to him cannot be reached by Monday. He will unallot $3 billion in state funding for areas such as health care, schools, public safety and local government aid. He indicated these cuts will be similar to his first budget proposal; if this is true, Minnesota will lose thousands of jobs in nursing homes, hospitals, schools and public safety. The health care of our families and seniors will be diminished, and the education of our children will be compromised.Let's first address Speaker Kelliher's statement that "the health care of our families and seniors will be diminished." I just spoke with someone familiar with the budget process. Here's what this contact told me about GAMC:
We have been talking to Minnesotans over the past several months, and they told us they are willing to pay for the things they value. I am committed to working hard over the next two days to strike a responsible budget agreement with the governor. I believe Minnesotans have the right to see all the budget options and to understand how they will impact their lives, and I encourage the governor to join us in reaching a compromise that stabilizes the Minnesota economy.
The decisions made these next two days must carry our state forward for years to come. With so much at stake, it is my hope Minnesotans will take the time to truly understand the choices we face and also know that in this very public process, their voices matter.
The GAMC population (32,000) cost us $700 million per biennium! Half of them would be eligible for MinnesotaCare.This contact said that Rep. Gottwalt's reform bill ( HF1865 ) would pick up a significant amount of the rest of the people.
After hearing that, I checked with Rep. Gottwalt to see if he'd heard if the DFL is reconsidering hsi reform legislation. I haven't heard anything from him but I'll update this post if and when I hear something from Rep. Gottwalt.
I just finished watching some sort of hearing on taxes. Sen. Pogemiller and Speaker Kelliher chaired the hearing; Sen. Bakk and Rep. Lenczewski also participated. Ward Einess testified as to the impact that the budget, as currently configured, would have on property taxes. One of the DFL legislators (sorry, I don't recall hearing their name) said that Gov. Pawlenty's budget would increase propert taxes by almost 9% on average statewide. Rep. Kohls objected to that, stating that propoerty taxes would go up 6+ percent if nothing was done.
The highlight of the meeting was when someone from the League of Cities said that "Gov. Pawlenty is raising property taxes" throughout the state, presumably by his refusing to raise income taxes. Rep. Kohls corrected that by saying that cities, county commissions, etc. raise property taxes and that it's their policies and priorities that determine what happens with property taxes.
Another noteworthy part of the hearing came when Sen. Bakk complained that Gov. Pawlenty had line-itemed out an appropriation that's near and dear to him. The first thought I had was that that's what happens when the legislature doesn't do its work.
In fact, the thing that ties this all together is that the DFL insisted on ignoring Gov. Pawlenty. They insisted on raising taxes even though they knew that a tax increase wasn't going to happen. When they sent the spending bills to Gov. Pawlenty, there was still a $3,000,000,000 deficit. The DFL couldn't get their act together on taxes.
The original House bill called for a $1,500,000,000 tax increase. The original Senate bill called for $2,200,000,000. The conference committee report was a rewrite and called for raising taxes by $920,000,000. All of those figures fall far short of the $3,000,000,000 deficit that would've happened had Gov. Pawlenty signed all of the DFL's bill as is. Let me state this clearly: The original Senate tax bill and the conference committee tax bill combined would've just barely been enough to close the DFL's deficit. In other words, the DFL's budget still wouldn't have balanced if they'd passed the Tax Increase Bill. It would've been $2,000,000,000 short.
Rep. Kohls agreed that cuts in LGA might result in property tax increases but that it's up to the county, city or other governmental agency to set its priorities and spending limits.
UPDATE: I just spoke with Rep. Gottwalt. The House was offering amendments to the Senate Omnibus bill for HHS. Rep. Gottwalt said that he submitted his legislation as an amendment to the Senate bill. Rep. Gottwalt said that the House adjourned with his amendment/legislation as the next amendment pending for consideration.
Posted Saturday, May 16, 2009 10:38 PM
No comments.
