January 1-3, 2011
Jan 01 10:38 What Dayton's Unforced Error Tells Us About Him Jan 01 17:20 Dayton Adding to Structural Deficit? Jan 02 07:54 DFL Flacking Ain't What It Used To Be Jan 02 20:22 Let's Make Wasserman-Schultz & Anthony Weiner the Face of House Democrats Jan 03 08:48 Discredit the Premise, Win the War Jan 03 08:29 Romney Is the CW Frontrunner Jan 03 17:01 Frazier New Vikings Head Coach Jan 03 23:58 Dayton Starting Off On Wrong Foot?
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
What Dayton's Unforced Error Tells Us About Him
Mark Dayton's pick of Paul Aasen is as much an unforced error as it is revealing. Conservatives understood that Dayton's pick for MPCA commissioner would be from the green community. That isn't what Republicans, myself included, are worried about. After all, elections have consequences.
In picking Mr. Aasen, Dayton did two things, neither of which help his public image. First, he picked a controversial nominee when it wasn't prudent. Aasen is controversial because his advocacy organization is known for it's extensive list of litigation, including litigation against the city of Alexandria :
In 2006, the city of Alexandria received the go-ahead from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to expand its wastewater treatment facility, a project MCEA opposed because of the increased phosphorus pollution the plant would deliver to Lake Winona. MCEA took the agency to court, and in the summer of 2007, the Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed with MCEA that the water discharge permit issued by the state would worsen pollution in Lake Winona, violating water quality standards and the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act.
The sewage treatment plant has for years dumped its waste into Lake Winona, which the state lists as severely impaired by excess phosphorus. The high phosphorus levels cause large algae blooms in the lake each summer.
While the Court of Appeals' decision was a clear victory for MCEA, the state Supreme Court agreed to hear the case on an appeal by the MPCA. MCEA Legal Director Kevin Reuther submitted MCEA's brief and gave oral arguments before the high court in early April of 2008.
In April 2009, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled 4-2 in favor of the Pollution Control Agency and against MCEA .
How can the MCEA call this a victory when the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled against them by a 4-2 margin? Winning at one level, then getting defeated at the next is a temporary win and longterm defeat. Anything beyond that is spin.
This is a major indicator of who Dayton is. Instead of picking a more centrist nominee, Dayton picked someone that appeals to the fringest of fringe elements of the DFL, someone that might be the biggest radical nominated to a major commissionership.
Before he's taken the oath of office, he's told Minnesotans that a) he isn't a centrist and b) he isn't the pro-jobs governor he's touted himself to be. How can you be pro-jobs when your nominee for MPCA Commissioner has a lengthy history of attacking businesses through litigation?
Aasen's organization is involved in all of the major job-killing lawsuits in Minnesota over the past 5 years. As head of the MPCA, Aasen will have their budget and prestige to attack, through litigation, companies that don't sufficiently sign onto the green agenda.
Dayton's press release said that Aasen would enforce "Minnesota's environmental laws, as they are written, impartially and efficiently.' How is that possible after he's shown strong opposition to companies that aren't his type of company?
Further, according to Dayton's press release, Aasen wants to make Minnesota's environmental laws more stringent :
'Mr. Aasen has assured me of his commitment to enforcing Minnesota's environmental laws, as they are written, impartially and efficiently,' said Governor-elect Dayton. 'He shares my view that the agency's mission, and I believe its name, should be changed from 'Pollution Control' to 'Pollution Reduction.' At the same time, Mr. Aasen's training, from his Master's Degree in Public Health at the University of Minnesota to six years as an Environmental Scientist at the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, provides him with the qualifications to be an objective and fair environmental regulator.'
Minnesota alread has some of the most stringent environmental laws in the nation. Mr. Aasen wants to make them more stringent, causing more industries and businesses to Minnesota when considering expansion in or moving to Minnesota.
It's obvious that Mr. Dayton's statements are just collections of words, that they aren't factually accurate. From this point forward, I'll be skeptical of everything his office releases.
Nominating Mr. Aasen is a major mistake. Nominating an activist who's committed to stifling job creation and who's threatened major job creators isn't the way a 'jobs governor' isn't a smart first step.
Most importantly, it tells us that Dayton isn't in touch with Minnesota. At a time when Minnesotans want robust job growth, Mark Dayton picked one of the most anti-jobs choices for MPCA commissioner.
That's rather telling, in my opinion.
Posted Saturday, January 1, 2011 10:38 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 01-Jan-11 01:36 PM
Reading the court's opinion is a sound precursor to commenting about it. I recommend it. Online:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=11038409371256768687&q=alexandria+pollution+control+agency&hl=en&as_sdt=100000004
The dissent believed the majority was too deferential to the laxity of the agency's determinations [under its then leadership structure].
The conflict will not again arise, now that the laxity has been abated.
The Clean Water Act will be honored, not fudged around and circumvented.
There's a new, better, sheriff in town. Plain and simple.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 01-Jan-11 02:33 PM
Regulatory & permitting reform is coming, too, something that's 100 X more popular, especially amongst unemployed construction workers. If Dayton & Aasen fight against these common sense reforms, expect Dayton & the DFL to take a major hit in 2012.
Comment 2 by Eric Austin at 01-Jan-11 04:51 PM
I bet Mark Dayton is absolutely shaking in his boots that some two bit blogger called one of his choices an "unforced error".
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 01-Jan-11 07:35 PM
How Dayton reacts is his business. When this extremist is defeated, I'll have the last laugh.
Dayton Adding to Structural Deficit?
According to this article , one of the first actions Gov. Dayton will take is add to the structural deficit Minnesota is facing:
Incoming Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton plans to make signing an executive order expanding the state's Medicaid program 1 of his first official acts.
Signing that executive order does a number of things, none of them positive. First, because the money isn't guaranteed beyond 2014, this EO adds to Minnesota's structural deficit. This isn't surprising since the DFL has had an extensive habit of using one-time money to plug operating deficits.
They've been employing that tactic since they spent the surplus during the 2007 session. Since then, they've used one-time money each year. What this proves is that a Dayton administration isn't committed to fiscal sanity, that they're really about throwing money at whichever special interest group is whining the loudest.
Fortunately, there's a fiscally sane legislature in place to prevent Gov. Dayton from spending Minnesota into California-like oblivion.
Next, it'll will prevent the Minnesota legislature from enacting real health care reform. This EO will prevent many initiatives the GOP-led chairmen would like to implement that would actually cost the state less money and would drive health care and health insurance costs down.
Another thing that Dayton signing the EO will do is tell Minnesotans that a Dayton administration will rely on the federal government to bail them out of difficult situations rather than figuring out an intelligent solution on its own.
That's what followers do. Leaders actually think for themselves. They put together solutions that make sense. Followers like Dayton just latch onto stopgap measures that "kick the can down the road" rather than solve problems.
As a senator, Dayton wasn't used to figuring out solutions. Most of the time, he'd just vote the way most Democrats voted, which meant doing what their special interest allies told them to do. That isn't the right training for solving problems.
There's a strong probability (some might say it's inevitable) that a Dayton administration will do what their special interest allies ask of them. That's the worst thing that could happen for Minnesota. The good news is that the GOP legislative majority will prevent most of Dayton's initiatives from getting enacted.
With a GOP majorities in the House and Senate, budgeting will change dramatically from the budget process from 2007-2010. Don't be surprised if there's more whining from the DFL and governor's mansion and more smiles from Minnesotans.
Posted Saturday, January 1, 2011 5:21 PM
Comment 1 by Mary at 01-Jan-11 08:04 PM
This legislature needs to wrap their collective brains around the fact that there is NO NEED to increase the budget for Medicaid. As a retired health care worker, and now working in the dental field, I can tell you that the problem with lack of funds is that there are too many people on MN and federally funded health care programs who SHOULD NEVER HAVE QUALIFIED in the first place. I see it every day. The safety net money is there for the most vulnerable United States citizens. But it is being diluted down by all of the non-citizens of this state and country who are allowed on the programs. Also there are many able bodied citizens who have made welfare and Medicaid a lifestyle.
When will we get a legislature and governor with spine enough to stop this? Expanding Medicaid just means putting more people on the program who should not qualify. What then happens to the citizens for which these programs were really meant to help? They end up getting their necessary services cut.
Comment 2 by J. Ewing at 02-Jan-11 07:31 AM
An interesting point, Mary. Whenever conservatives want to "cut" some welfare program or the other, the looney left always talks about cutting "the most vulnerable" off from support, when it is always the LEAST vulnerable who get trimmed in any rationalization of program eligibility requirements. When Wisconsin first introduced a work requirement for welfare recipients, 20% of them voluntary left the welfare rolls. These were not the most in need, obviously, but those selfishly feeding at the public trough.
Oh, they will scream bloody murder. The GOP just needs to do what is right and keep going. I'm hoping that Dayton's first EO gets challenged in court, or denied by the legislature. It's what is right and necessary, and a good start.
Comment 3 by bob at 02-Jan-11 10:50 AM
With the newly elected Governor accepting the funds requires the state to come up with matching funds(comments have been somewhere between $160 to $500 million)which is coming from fees on providors set by the state. Who knows what the amount will be in two years when we have to undertake the obligation primarily by the state. While the program has benefit, what will be the charge to the public in higher healthcare premiums or higher providor fees now and in two years? Appears to me to be a narrow, blinder view of thinking of what the state can afford and undertake in this economy versus that of satisfying special interests(43%).
DFL Flacking Ain't What It Used To Be
I just finished listening to Blois Olson debate Ben Golnik on @Issue With Tom Hauser. I just about pulled what's left of my hair out when Olson replied that Dayton's cabinets picks weren't controversial.
This isn't spin. It's an outright lie. He knows that more and more people are viewing Paul Aasen as controversial, thanks in large part to major news organizations like MPR PIM linking to what I've written here.
They're finding out that Mr. Aasen's organization, MCEA, has been involved in lawsuits that've killed thousands of construction jobs and hundreds of permanent high-paying jobs. MCEA hasn't discriminated in its lawsuits, suing cities, proposed power plants, mining companies and logging projects.
I hope Mr. Olson isn't suggesting that the 'jobs governor' nominating a man with a lengthy record of killing jobs, especially at a time when too many Minnesotans are unemployed, isn't controversial.
Later in the Face-Off segment, Javier Morillo-Alicea, one of the mnajor non-talents in Minnesota punditocracy, tried explaining that Dayton's empty cabinet is because he's had to interview people from all over the state before whittling down the list to a list of finalists, then making his picks.
The reality is that Dayton should've had a list of nominees during the campaign. This is what all campaigns do, especially presidential campaigns. There's no excuse for Dayton's unpreparedness and indecisiveness.
Thus far, Dayton's actions suggest that he'll be one of Minnesota's weakest and ill-prepared governors. I suspect that he'll be exposed as incompetent by the end of the 2011 legislative session.
Posted Sunday, January 2, 2011 7:54 AM
Comment 1 by Eric Austin at 02-Jan-11 10:53 AM
There's a shocker! YOU think DFL pundits are wrong? It's like my world has been turned upside down!
AND you think DFL Governor Mark Dayton is weak? I would have never guessed THAT.
This post just rocked my world!!!
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 02-Jan-11 12:05 PM
Be a smartass if you'd like but you still haven't made an intellectually compelling case. Insults are what I expect from the average progressive. In doing so, you met expectations.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 02-Jan-11 08:13 PM
Come on Gary the problem they have is that liberal democrats don't see problems. After all one Obama aide with a straight face said two of her heroes were Mao and Mother Theresa. Two very different people.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Let's Make Wasserman-Schultz & Anthony Weiner the Face of House Democrats
If there's anything useful to come from Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's and Anthony Weiner's appearance on Face the Nation this morning, it's that Republicans should try and make them the face of the Democratic Party as frequently as possible.
After Rep.-Elect Mike Kelly said that he didn't know how "you people can ring up $14,000,000,000,000 of debt and say you're doing a good job", Weiner replied "You're now part of that you guys now." Excuse me, Rep. Weiner, but you're full of it. Rep.-Elect Kelly, (R-PA), didn't vote for the failed stimulus, the pork-filled first omnibus bill or Obamacare.
In fact, all that legislation passed without a single House GOP vote. They were smart enough to not want their fingerprints on that bunch of job-killing, deficit-exploding legislation. Which brings me to Rep. Wasserman-Schultz on the deficit:
"Let's remember the deficit was exploded by Republicans. President Bush inherited a record surplus and turned it into a record deficit. Two wars unpaid for, a prescription drug plan unpaid for, tax cuts unpaid for. So the deficit that we found ourselves in was thanks to the Republicans," she said.
I won't dispute that the Republicans overspent while they were the majority. That's statistical fact. What's also statistical fact is that, starting in 2009, Democrats made the overspending Republicans look like Ebenezer Scrooge.
Never in this nation's history did the annual deficit exceed $500,000,000,000 prior to Obama becoming president. That's statistical fact, too. Immediately following his inauguration, however, the Democrats went on an unprecedented spending spree, adding $3,000,000,000,000 to the debt the first 2 years of the Obama administration. This year's deficit will eclipse the $1,000,000,000,000, too.
That means the Obama administration will have added more to the national debt in 3 years than President Bush did in 8 years. In fact, this administration will 'beat' the Bush administration's 8 year deficits before the current CR expires. That's 30 months vs. 8 years.
Rep. Wasserman-Schultz can spin all she'd like but that's reality.
Frankly, Rep. Wasserman-Schultz and Rep. Weiner are a pair of spoiled brats who couldn't tell the truth on a consistent basis if their life depended on it. That's why a smart GOP strategist, if they still exist in DC, would highlight Rep. Wasserman-Schultz and Rep. Weiner at every opportunity they got.
They'll turn off independents faster than I can turn off a light switch.
The other thing coming from Rep. Wasserman-Schultz and Rep. Weiner during this morning's interview was their repeating the Democrats' talking point about it being more difficult to govern than it is to campaign. They should know; they campaigned like centrists but they've governed like radicals.
They also repeated the Democrats' mantra that it's easy being against things but tougher being for things. That's projection. Republicans have stood for things for quite some time. It isn't the Republicans' fault that the Democrats' allies in the media wouldn't report on the GOP's great ideas.
Now they're the majority in the House. Now they've got a great nucleus of fiscal conservatives who also are great ambassadors for limited government. Now conservatives like Mike Pence, Jeb Hensarling, Paul Ryan, Thad McCotter, Michael Burgess, combined with incoming conservative freshmen like Chip Cravaack and Tim Scott, will go on the offensive.
This talk the last 2 weeks about President Obama getting his mojo back, etc, etc, is just that: talk. Now that the numbers are shifting and a serious man like Paul Ryan will be the Republicans' point person on getting spending under control, President Obama will find himself overmatched.
What's most stunning to me is that these Democrats act like Nov. 2 didn't happen, like the American people didn't fire Democrats in numbers not seen since 1938. They're still the same arrogant people that turned off independents in droves.
The other thing that I couldn't believe was Rep. Weiner talking about shutting the government down. First, we're miles from that. Second, the dynamics are emphatically different. The Gingrich shutdown wasn't what the American people wanted, partially because they viewed President Clinton as reasonable.
Americans now, especially amongst the TEA Party faithful, see President Obama as reckless and out-of-control. They want spending controlled. If Democrats prove that they aren't serious about cutting spending, then they'll lose with everyone except their base.
One of the first things that Rep. Weiner said was that Republicans had campaigned on privatizing Social Security. That's insulting. There might've been 1 or 2 candidates who talked about that...maybe...but that's it. The central focus of the NRCC's campaign was cutting spending, repealing Obamacare and creating jobs, though not in that order.
The mantra about Republicans having difficulty governing is the Democrats' attempt to raise expectations. It's a foolish tactic. If Republicans's spending cuts are substantial, they'll be seen as serious. If they're judged to be serious, they'll have a very successful 2012 election cycle.
That also likely means President Obama won't have a great 2012 election cycle. He isn't a budget cutter. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. That's what the American people expect. That's the message they sent sixty short days ago.
The truth is that House Democrats, after ruling the roost the last 2 years, will largely be irrelevant and grating on the nerves. If Republicans are smart, they'll isolate Rep. Weiner and Rep. Wasserman-Schultz and make them the face of the Democratic Party.
Posted Sunday, January 2, 2011 8:22 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 02-Jan-11 09:52 PM
Gary:
If that smart person existed they will do a chart that shows this was the deficit in 2006 when the Democrats took control. This was the spending in 2006 when Democrats took control. Then they can show what the Republicans did because they kept their word.
That should cause anybody, but people who want the government to spend money on them to vote Republican in 2012.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 02-Jan-11 11:59 PM
That smart person exists. The powers-that-be just haven't hired him (me) yet. This isn't complicated. It's time they turned to the guy who's figured it out. Unfortunately, pride is preventing too many of the powers-that-be from making that decision.
Discredit the Premise, Win the War
All campaign, Mark Dayton talked about how he'd be the jobs governor. When serious people took a close look at his budget, though, they noticed that his plan didn't fit together that well. Most importantly, they've noticed that it doesn't balance or create jobs.
I know I've harped on this excessively but the truth is Mark Dayton isn't a 'jobs governor', whatever that is. He's someone who's delivered that line well enough to fool enough voters.
One of the things that tells us everything we need to know about him is that Dayton thinks Minnesota's stringent environmental regulations aren't stringent enough.
Another thing that tells us alot about him is that he's picked an extremist whose organization has fought every major employment opportunity in the state with litigation that approaches attrition. Why should we think Paul Aasen will suddenly stop being the environmental extremist he's been for so long now that he's heading a state agency that deals with environmental issues?
There's nothing in Dayton's recent history that suggests he'll build an economic foundation that's diversified to prevent the temperamental mood swings that Minnesota's economy is well-known for.
There's ample proof that Mark Dayton's economic plan will fail because it's built on creating green energy jobs and raising taxes on Minnesota's job creators out of Minnesota.
Let's also remind ourselves that we can't trust Mark Dayton. During most of the campaign, he told EdMinn that he'd raise K-12 funding "without exception, without excuses." Then he found out his intellectually bankrupt tax-the-rich scheme wouldn't produce the $4,000,000,000 in increased revenues that he'd predicted. Instead, he was told that it'd only generate $1,900,000,000 in additional revenues.
Suddenly, his promise to increase K-12 spending "without exception, without excuses" disappeared.
One of the first things the Dayton administration will propose is a $1,000,000,000 bonding bill. That's more than ironic because they aren't lifting a finger to get PolyMet built. I wrote last week that that project would create 1,500,000 hours of construction work, roughly the equivalent of a $300,000,000-$500,000,000 bonding bill.
Bonding bill advocates say it's a good deal because interest rates are low. I'd argue that the PolyMet project is a far superior deal high-it'll create 400 high-paying permanent jobs in addition to the construction work it'll generate. What's more is that Minnesota won't have to borrow a penny to reap this economic reward.
Anyone that'd like to argue with me that it's better for the state government to borrow money, even at a low interest rate, on projects of varying degrees of economic importance than just helping a private corporation invest its own money is itching for making a terrible bet.
How on God's green earth can we trust in a governor who'd make these illogical, overly expensive decisions instead of just letting businesses innovate?
By the time this session wraps up, Mark Dayton will be exposed as a lightweight governor who wasn't prepared for the job and who broke the biggest of his campaign promises.
Trusting someone who won't keep campaign promises is bad enough. Trusting someone who doesn't get it on economics is worse. We're faced with someone who didn't keep his campaign promises and who doesn't have a clue about economics.
Posted Monday, January 3, 2011 8:48 AM
No comments.
Romney Is the CW Frontrunner
There's no arguing that Mitt Romney is the CW's frontrunner. There's also no doubt but that he's fatally flawed in ways that John McCain wasn't in 2008. I'm writing this to agree with Paul Mirengoff's post on the subject.
Paul rightly notes that "2010 has conditioned many of us to believe that the dynamics of the Party have been transformed." That's just part of the problem, though it's a significant, possibly insurmountable problem.
In addition to Mitt's Romneycare difficulties, people have noticed that he's had a habit of changing positions from election cycle to election cycle. While I'd far rather have Mitt putting our budgets together than President Obama, I'd far rather have Mitch Daniels or Tim Pawlenty putting the budgets together than President Obama or Mitt.
The other flaw that hasn't disappeared is his likeability problem, which was exposed in Iowa. That's when he outspent Mike Huckabee by a 9:1 margin and still lost.
That isn't to suggest that Huckabee deserves frontrunner status, either. It's merely a statement of historical fact. I'd argue, as Paul does, that the 2011 GOP is a more forward-looking political party than it's ever been.
The GOP once was known for nominating the next-guy-in-line types. That isn't its identity in 2011. Its current identity, thanks to the TEA Party movement, is that of picking conservatives who consistently follow the U.S. Constitution.
That certainly doesn't fit Romney or Huckabee. That's what's earned them a demotion from frontrunner status with major blocks of Republican activists.
Posted Monday, January 3, 2011 8:29 AM
No comments.
Frazier New Vikings Head Coach
As a lifelong Vikings fan, I loved hearing the news that the Wilf family has removed interim from Leslie Frazier's title. This afternoon, He'll be introduced as the 8th head coach in Vikings' history, following Norm Van Brocklin, Bud Grant, Les Steckel, Jerry Burns, Denny Green, Mike Tice and Brad Childress.
The Vikings issued this statement upon hiring Coach Frazier on a permanent basis:
"We are very excited to announce Leslie Frazier as the new Head Coach of the Minnesota Vikings," said Vikings Owner/President Mark Wilf. "Leslie is well-respected by our players, coaches and front office staff and has proven to be a winner on the field at every level of playing and coaching. He has a strong presence in the locker room and is an excellent leader, as demonstrated during some of the recent challenges we have faced."
Prior to being named interim head coach, Frazier served as the Vikings defensive coordinator from 2007-10, adding Assistant Head Coach to his title in 2008. His defensive units have ranked in the top 10 in each of the last three seasons (#6 in 2008, #6 in 2009 and #8 in 2010) while notching 162 sacks from 2007-10 (40.5 avg. per season), the 5th-most of any NFL team during that time. Under Frazier, the Vikings defense allowed the 2nd-fewest rushing yards per game (85.1 avg.) and the 9th-fewest points per game (20.4 avg.) in the NFL over the last four years.
"We are thrilled that Leslie Frazier will continue to lead this football team," said Vikings Owner/Chairman Zygi Wilf. "Our players and entire organization have great respect for Leslie. He has a vast knowledge of the game, both as a former player and as a coach, and he has a terrific way with those who play for him and work with him. We are very fortunate to have him as our Head Coach and look forward to many successful years together.
The thing that's almost as exciting is the rumor that, because it's likely that Fred Pagac (pronounced pug-ich) will be the defensive coordinator, Leslie Frazier will want to hire Mike Singletary to be his linebackers coach/assistant head coach.
Leslie Frazier showed during the last 6 weeks what type of leader he is. The players could've checked out. In fact, they had checked out for Coach Childress. Instead, while the Vikings still struggled because they were outmatched in many of those 6 games, they still fought until the final snap of the season. That isn't a small consideration when hiring a coach.
If the Vikings do indeed hire Mike Singletary as their linebackers coach, they'll be getting the best in the business at that position. When he played, the TV crews would get a shot of his eyes at least once a game. They even coined the phrase "Mike Singletary eyes" because of the intensity in his eyes.
Simply put, as middle linebackers go, Singletary is part of an elite group, joined only by Ray Nitschke, Dick Butkus and Jack Lambert. It would make Coach Frazier's much easier having a unit of the team where he can just give the guy his assignment, then not have to worry about whether the assignment would be carried out.
A team coached by Leslie Frazier and with Mike Singletary as linebackers coach and Pagac as defensive coordinator will be an aggressive defensive team.
The Vikings have some rebuilding to do but they now have the right coach leading them. They've finished a trying, challenging season. They're facing alot of questions this offseason, with the NFL-NFLPA collective bargaining agreement unsettled, with a coaching staff to fill out and with a number of personnel decisions to make.
It's a great thing that they've got the right man at the top involved in the decisionmaking.
Posted Monday, January 3, 2011 5:01 PM
Comment 1 by James Douglass at 03-Jan-11 07:17 PM
Great choice by the Wilf family and a great choice by their new Head Coach Leslie Frazier.
Looking forward to seeing the Viking return to a more dominant role in their division.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 03-Jan-11 10:57 PM
Gary:
Silly question like we do for counting for Presidents, but isn't Leslie the 9th coach since Grant served as coach at two different times? Of course nobody in the media bothered to point out that Obama didn't know he was only the 43rd man to serve as President of the United States even though he's considered to be the 44th President of the United States.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 03-Jan-11 11:35 PM
It isn't a silly question but we don't count coaches like we count presidents.
Dayton Starting Off On Wrong Foot?
According to this highly unscientific poll , Gov. Dayton is starting off on the wrong foot. With 1,723 votes cast, 50.7 percent of respondents said his top priority should be "ease taxes and regulations to unleash the private sector and grow jobs", 37.2 percent said he should "properly fund the public sector, while ensuring tax and fee burdens are progressive, not regressive", with 12.1 percent saying he should "improve public education."
In short, more people think that cutting taxes and reforming Minnesota's regulations is more important than improving public education and properly funding "the public sector, while ensuring tax and fee burdens are progressive, not regressive" combined. It's telling that the minority positions are Dayton's 2 highest priorities.
Again, this isn't a scientific poll but I've heard similar anecdotal information. That's why I think Gov. Dayton will be seen as a weak governor. While I admit that my ideology is different than Gov. Dayton's, that isn't why I think he's in for a difficult year.
Simply put, the GOP legislature sides with the majority of Minnesotans. That potentially puts the DFL in a difficult negotiating position at the end of session.
With the support that the GOP experienced this campaign and with that support staying strong, there's no reason to think that they won't win most of the arguments.
Let's put something else to rest. This notion that people want Dayton and the GOP legislature to work together is THE goal doesn't wash with me. What the people want is for the best ideas to be implemented ASAP.
Hypothetically speaking, if that means that all of the GOP's policies are adopted and none of the DFL policies are adopted but Minnesota's economy takes off, the deficit disappears and prosperity returns for a generation, the people won't care about working together. They'll care that their lives are better.
What the people care most about is their government getting things right the first time. If that it means one side swallowing their pride, then that's what they expect.
If Mark Dayton wants a great legacy, he'll swallow his pride rather than insist on pushing his tax-the-rich scheme. It also means taking down his nominee to be the MPCA commissioner. Dayton's tax-the-rich scheme will hurt Minnesota's economy. Paul Aasen has a lengthy record of opposing job-creating projects. Needless to say, his commissionership won't help Minnesota's economy either.
Posted Monday, January 3, 2011 11:58 PM
No comments.
