July 18-23, 2011
Jul 18 02:58 DFL Legislative Leaders Omitted From Negotiations Jul 18 11:13 Debt ceiling debate: van Hollen overmatched against Jordan Jul 19 03:20 Government Shutdown, Shameless Leadership Edition Jul 19 06:40 FNC's Pundits Looking Stupid Jul 20 05:22 Freshman GOP Legislator Makes His Mark Through Key Reform Jul 21 03:46 DFL legislators weren't profiles in productivity Jul 21 14:35 DC Republicans: Statesmanship gambit isn't working Jul 23 11:05 Dayton the Reformer vs. the DFL?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
DFL Legislative Leaders Omitted From Negotiations
I'd heard this weekend that DFL legislative leaders were being excluded from budget talks. I now have confirmation of that thanks to this Strib article :
Democratic legislators said GOP leaders have frozen them out of budget talks, so they have no plans to put up any votes for the final budget deal. That means Republicans, who hold small majorities in both bodies, must come through with nearly all of their votes to pass a budget.
I'm not the least bit surprised at freezing Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen out of the negotiations. They're the people who've sabotaged the process each time it looked like Gov. Dayton was getting close to finishing a deal. Of course, GOP legislators are going to lock them out.
They've been troublemakers from before the shutdown, starting with the regular session. During the regular session, Rep. Thissen and Sen. Bakk, especially Rep. Thissen, did everything in the power to oppose Republicans' reforms, even reforms that have 65-75% support with Minnesotans.
Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen refused to create a set of redistricting maps. The only thing Sen. Bakk added to the equation was this pathetic statement :
State Senate DFL leaders Saturday accused Republican lawmakers of steam rolling the redistricting plans through the Legislature.
'We have strong disagreements about the process that you and the House majorities are employing to pass redistricting bills that you know will be vetoed by the Governor,' Senate Majority Leader Tom Bakk, DFL-Cook, and DFL redistricting lead Sen. Ann Rest, of New Hope, wrote to the Republican Senate leaders.
The Democrats said Republicans moved so quickly in the process that some of their meetings didn't even meet the minimum public notice requirements, the letter said.
'Your approach has been to steamroller principles and maps through the House and Senate,' they wrote.
The bottom line is this: Sen. Bakk did nothing to help resolve an important, constitutionally mandated issue. Now Sen. Bakk wonders why he isn't included in the final negotiations? You can't be serious.
Let's remember June 30. It started with Gov. Dayton taking taxes off the table. After Sen. Kock and Speaker Zellers spoke with their respective caucuses, they returned to Gov. Dayton's office 45 minutes later with a counterproposal with a minor change in it.
In that brief 45 minutes, Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen talked Gov. Dayton out of taking taxes of the table. Now they wonder why they're getting this treatement during final negotiations? I don't think so. I think they're just being a couple of whiny spoiled brats.
The other laughable part of that paragraph was Sen. Bakk saying that "they have no plans to put up any votes for the final budget deal." Whether they were included or excluded in final negotiations, they weren't expected to bring any votes to the table.
Simply put, Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen have been perfect illustrations of the DFL's Do-Nothing Legislature.
Posted Monday, July 18, 2011 2:58 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 18-Jul-11 07:16 AM
The process was sabotaged by the legislative members in the majority.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Jul-11 08:09 AM
That's BS. That isn't the view of the majority of Minnesota voters. It's dunderheaded to think that people that campaigned on cutting spending, not raising taxes and making changes to how government operates, then got elected on that agenda, sabotaged anything. Here's the definition of sabotage:
any underhand interference with production, work, etc., in a plant, factory, etc., as by enemy agents during wartime or by employees during a trade dispute.
any undermining of a cause.Technically, it's true that conservatives are undermining the liberals cause but that's doing the will of the people so I'm ok with that.
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 18-Jul-11 11:47 AM
Good Lord. Passing three balanced budgets now constitutes 'sabotage' in the eyes of the left. That's not even good spin.
Comment 3 by walter hanson at 18-Jul-11 04:32 PM
Eric:
Okay so what you're saying that the leaders went back to the cacus and said this is what we want to offer Dayton. They walk back to Dayton and offer what the members said they can offer.
The deal can't take place because Dayton changes the terms of what he wants to do the deal.
Just where exactly in this process did the majority leaders sabotage the process. The sabotage is clearly by Dayton and the DFL leaders.
So Eric post when you have a real thought and not a DFL talking point.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Debt ceiling debate: van Hollen overmatched against Jordan
This video of Chris Wallace's interview of Rep. Jim Jordan, (R-OH), and Rep. Chris van Hollen, (D-MD), shows how overmatched Democrats are in the debt ceiling debate. This is the partial transcript of the key portion of the interview:
JORDAN: A couple of things. Think about what the President's framework is because there's no specificity to his proposal. Think about his framework. Here's what he's saying: All the spending that the Democrats did in the last Congress, the stimulus, Obamacare, their budget, all the spending they did, that we all voted against and that the American people didn't like, as evidenced by last November's elections, the President is now asking us 'Hey, Republicans, vote for a debt ceiling increase even though you campaigned against it and the voters elected you to be against it, vote for a debt ceiling increase, and just to add insult to injury, vote for a tax increase too.
Wallace then asks if he'd vote for the plan if they could get the specificity Rep. Jordan wants. Here's Rep. Jordan's response:
REP. JORDAN: First, all the spending cuts happen in the out years. He never gives us any details on what's going to happen the first year, which is the only year we can make law on. The tax increases are going to happen soon. This is the old Lucy and Charlie Brown with the football. The American people said 'We're not falling for that trick again. We're not going to let you promise spending cuts in the out years and raise taxes now. If these tax things were so bad, well the Democrats controlled the government just 8 months ago, why didn't they end them then?
That's the bottom line. Promised spending cuts years from now don't mean a thing. It says that we'll raise the ceiling and go on spending happily ever after. That isn't acceptable.
In November, 2010, voters rejected politicians that wanted to spend too much while simultaneously telling people that platitude-filled speeches just didn't work. Whether it's one of President Obama's platitude-filled speeches or it's Rep. van Hollen defending one of President Obama's platitude-filled speeches, they just aren't what voters are looking for.
President Obama's platitude-filled are like getting invited to a 3 course gourmet meal, only to find out that the first course is soup, the second course is gravy and desert is jello. While all three things may taste ok, it won't do more than wake up your appetite. After that type of experience, most people will find a real restaurant where their needs get met.
The entire interview lasts 15:40. Still, I strongly recommend everyone watch it from beginning to end. It's that much fun watching Rep. Jordan demolishing van Hollen's talking points arguments.
Posted Monday, July 18, 2011 11:13 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 18-Jul-11 04:35 PM
Gary:
I'm surprised that Jordan didn't point out if the debt ceiling isn't increased Obama has to do about $200 billion plus in cuts in this year's budget. Those are real cuts! Lets do it!!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 18-Jul-11 10:16 PM
Walter, That isn't the compelling argument that'll win over independents. Sen. Coburn's cuts make 100X more sense than anything that scattergun approaches, favored by people like Michele Bachmann, make. Let's abandon the knee-jerk types of thinking of Michele Bachmann. Let's gravitate towards Sen. Coburn's plan.
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 18-Jul-11 10:51 PM
Gary:
The point is that Obama is thinking of offering $4 billion in budget cuts next year and promises the large cuts years after he has left office.
I'm just asking for large and real cuts now. Okay if he doesn't want to give them for the fiscal 2011 budget then he has to give them for fiscal year 2012.
Rubio on Sunday laid out the case how much spending has been increased in two years. Obama is talking like that large increase is untouchable!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by Bob J. at 19-Jul-11 10:08 AM
Gary, the problem with Coburn's plan is of course that this Congress is unable to legislate for future Congresses. Do we really care what the Congress decided in 2001 for spending this year? Of course not, though if we spent to 2001 levels we'd be a heck of a lot better off.
Coburn's plan is a start, but only a start. Cuts must be front-end loaded if they are to be meaningful, and in the eyes of many of us, must be front-end loaded if they are to take place at all.
It sounds great to say the government will be 25 percent smaller in ten years, but unfortunately future bodies will not be bound by what Coburn proposes without a Constitutional amendment.
Government Shutdown, Shameless Leadership Edition
One thing that's getting clearer by the day is that the shutdown should be blamed on Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen. In tonight's conference call, Michael Brodkorb was asked whether Sen. Thissen and Rep. Bakk talked Gov. Dayton out of his initial June 30 offer where he took his tax increases off the table.
Brodkorb said he could confirm that Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen were in the room when Speaker Zellers and Leader Koch returned to say that they'd accept Gov. Dayton's offer. At that time, Gov. Dayton said that he'd changed his mind and that tax increases had to be part of the final solution.
It's important to remember that Speaker Zellers and Sen. Koch returned only 45 minutes after Gov. Dayton's initial offer. The only thing that'd changed was that Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen weren't in the room when Gov. Dayton made his initial offer but they were there when he'd reversed himself.
Brodkorb then said that "The only thing that Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen had done since the start of the session was cash paychecks. You can quote me on that."
That squares with other reports from the Capitol.
Another thing that was confirmed tonight, though not through the conference call, is that DFL legislators weren't playing constructive roles in the negotiations. It's been confirmed that DFL legislative leaders have tried defending the status quo.
That isn't playing well with the GOP leadership. They've been on a mission to get as many reforms accepted in the final budget package as possible. Thus far, the reports are that the GOP negotiators are succeeding.
Posted Tuesday, July 19, 2011 3:20 AM
Comment 1 by Mary at 19-Jul-11 02:35 PM
An incompetent governor who gives his word and then 45 minutes later it means nothing. He is unable to make a coherent decision on his own without his two minions helping him out. How do you negotiate with him when you do not know which Mark Dayton will show up from one minute to the next? YIPPEE! That's our leader of MN for the next 3 and 1/2 years!
Comment 2 by eric z. at 20-Jul-11 03:32 PM
Your guy, KB, he cashed paychecks AND delivered local pork.
That's a gold star, for multitasking.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Jul-11 03:50 PM
Eric, you'd better invest in a dictionary. The ISILF building will finally move SCSU's science department into the 21st Century. It'll better prepare students for careers in science.
SCSU's science buildings were outdated a decade ago. ISILF represents a major upgrade.
Finally, bonding bills are required by state law to spend a percentage of their money on higher ed projects. This meets that requirement.
*******
Yes, King collected his check. The misconception is that legislators got paid extra for the special session. That's false. Legislators are paid $31,140 in salary per year whether they finish on time or go into a special session.
Comment 3 by eric z. at 20-Jul-11 04:53 PM
Across the aisle, it's low pay on either side. I just jumped that Brodkorb quote you'd posted. I had to. He was being gratuitously nasty in what he said. That's all.
I do not begrudge any payment to the university system.
However, it is the Twin Cities graduate programs that really offer the skill levels for Minnesota to remain attractive to firms like Siemens or 3M.
I think too many in the legislature are tuned out on that one. But it is easy to yell pork, and such, and it gets done more on one side than the other. So it should come around.
Gary, in Anoka County where I live, Jungbauer got something, uncertain in amount for now, for his Ramsey Northstar stop. $20 million was routed through Met Council, earmarked for a number of projects. Met Council appears to have the final say on slicing that pie, but my guess is that understandings were in place "before the check was authorized."
In your area, SCSU got the upgrade, but the civic center and extending Northstar beyond Big Lake were left begging.
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Jul-11 10:21 PM
Frankly, the Met Council needs to not exist anymore. They're totally useless except in prolonging political careers. They're totally unaccountable, which isn't acceptable. They piss away money, which I don't like. Their priorities are worthless.
FNC's Pundits Looking Stupid
In a very short period of time, FNC pundits Bill O'Reilly, Brit Hume, Bernie Goldberg and Charles Krauthammer have made fools of themselves by telling the world that Republicans are getting whipped on the debt ceiling debate.
What's particularly embarassing is that they're all basing their opinion on a CBS poll that isn't worth the bandwidth it's printed on. Ed Morrissey mockingly dismantled the poll in this post :
Have Democrats leaped to an eleven-point registration advantage in the last five weeks? In early June , a CBS News poll showed a D/R/I sample of 30/30/40, which undersampled both parties slightly in favor of independents, even weighting it to slightly favor Republicans. In their latest poll today on the debt ceiling debate, CBS offers one of its most egregious poll samples in recent memory to pursue the 'public blames the GOP' meme:
Americans are unimpressed with their political leaders' handling of the debt ceiling crisis, with a new CBS News poll showing a majority disapprove of all the involved parties' conduct, but Republicans in Congress fare the worst, with just 21 percent backing their resistance to raising taxes.
President Obama earned the most generous approval ratings for his handling of the weeks-old negotiations, but still more people said they disapproved (48 percent) than approved (43 percent) of what he has done and said. :
Approval drops to 31 percent for the Democrats in Congress, and only 21 percent of the people surveyed said they approved of Republicans' handling of the negotiations, while 71 percent disapprove.
Gee, a 10-point difference, huh? What a coincidence!
What's most embarassing is the fact that this poll polled 810 adults. For a national poll, that's a tiny sample. Second, polling adults is the least predictive type of polling. Scott Rasmussen's polling always polls likely voters. Ditto with KSTP-SUSA polling.
It's easy to believe a blowhard like O'Reilly got this wrong. O'Reilly getting things wrong isn't news. It isn't easy to believe that Goldberg, Hume and Krauthammer getting the PR war angle this badly wrong. What they're telling me to believe is that America has reverted back to gullible Obama-trusting idiots from the 2008 cycle.
Poll after poll shows people don't trust President Obama's handling of the economy by 15-20 point margins. Despite this fact, I'm supposed to believe that the American people suddenly trust the man they rejected in the 2010 midterms.
That's absurd.
If their theory was right, Minnesota Republicans would've been forced to cave in their budget talks with Gov. Dayton. That didn't happen. Instead, Gov. Dayton caved. Minnesota Republicans held the line on taxes, Dayton's signature issue, while getting most of the reforms they passed during the regular session.
The Minnesota experience tells me that John Q. Public still trusts and prefers the Republicans' policies.
There's another factor that Mssrs. Goldberg, Hume and Krauthammer aren't factoring in: people don't think that President Obama has gotten over his big spending ways. People know that he's the same guy who went on the biggest, longest-lasting spending spree in this nation's history.
Suddenly, I'm supposed to believe that he's changed totally? I don't think so. President Obama is who he is: the most liberal president in American history.
Krauthammer, Hume and Goldberg are telling me that I should forget about an historic midterm election that was the deepest changing of the nation's mood. In addition to the 63 seats Republicans gained in the U.S. House, they added 680 legislative seats, 19 legislative majorities and 5 governorships in 2010.
People at every level and in every section of the country rejected Obamanomics and the Democrats' policies but they suddenly trust President Obama on the debt ceiling debate?
That's insulting. Mssrs. Goldberg, Hume and Krauthammer should be ashamed of themselves for thinking such things.
Posted Tuesday, July 19, 2011 6:40 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 19-Jul-11 08:53 AM
Gary:
In one sense the poll makes sense.
The Democrats are on the same message point which the Repubicans aren't.
The other thing is some people point out that they're not happy with Obama on healthcare wasn't a view point that they hated the plan. They wanted things to the plan which wasn't in it. I think part of the poll is reflected that some people don't like the Repubicans caving.
Example you criticized my point lets takes $200 billion of instant budget cuts. There are people who think lets not increase the limit at all. They're going to say since everybody wants to raise the debt ceiling that everyone is doing a bad job.
With the plan being put out today maybe we can get the Republicans on one voice and the public understanding one plan while Obama still hasn't put a real plan on the table.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 19-Jul-11 10:04 AM
The only name on that list that should surprise anyone is Hume, who really should know better. Krauthammer is still trying to live down his 2008 Obama-love among conservatives and Goldberg is pure dinosaur media.
Comment 3 by eric z. at 20-Jul-11 03:26 PM
My understanding is Ron Paul said the Fed should simply cancel the debt instruments it holds. Since it prints the money and controls the money supply, it makes sense.
That would moot all that other stuff, the BS from both sides.
And explain, I don't understand, why taxpayers should pay money to the government so the government can give that taxpayer money to the banking system, to the bankers and banks through the Fed as a conduit; because that's social welfare transfer payments and I have been told by more than one Republican that social welfare transfer payments are bad.
Perhaps Professor KB can explain to me why Ron Paul's idea is bad economic policy.
I await that.
Freshman GOP Legislator Makes His Mark Through Key Reform
After the buydget deal was initially announced, conservatives rightly were critical of the education funding shifts, the borrowing against the tobacco settlement annuity and other considerations.
At the time, Mitch Berg and other conservative bloggers insisted that the deal include serious reforms . Rep. King Banaian's Sunset Advisory Commission legislation is part of the final budget deal. Here's part of what the State Government Finance bill summary says about King's reform:
Sunset Commission. Provides that the Sunset Commission consists of 12 members appointed as follows:
(1) four senators appointed according to the rules of the senate, with no more than three senators from the majority caucus;
(2) four members of the house of representatives, appointed by the speaker, with no more than three of the house members from the majority caucus;
(3) four members appointed by the governor.
All members serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. With respect to governor appointees, provides two-year terms expiring in January of each odd-numbered year. Provides term limits for service on the commission.
Staff. Requires the Legislative Coordinating Commission to provide staff and administrative services for the commission.
Rules. Authorizes the commission to adopt rules to carry out this chapter.
Agency report to commission. Provides that before September 1 of the odd-numbered year in which a state agency is subject to sunset review, the agency commissioner shall report specified information to the commission. The September 1 deadline does not apply in 2011.
Commission duties. Requires that before January 1 of the year in which a state agency is subject to sunset review, the commission must review the agency based on criteria specified in section 3D.10.
Public hearings. Requires that before February 1 of the year an agency is subject to sunset review, the commission must conduct public hearings regarding the agency, including the criteria specified in section 3D.10.
Commission report. Requires that by February 1 of each even-numbered year, the commission shall report on agencies subject to review, including findings on criteria specified in section 3D.10.
Criteria for review. Specifies criteria for the commission to consider in determining whether a public need exists for the continuation of a state agency or for performance of the agency's functions.
Recommendations. Requires the commission's report to make recommendations on the abolition, continuation, or reorganization of agencies, on the need for performance of the functions of the agency; on consolidation, transfer, or reorganization of programs within agencies not under review when programs duplicate functions of agencies under review; and for improvement of operations.
Requires the commission to submit draft legislation to carry out its recommendations, including legislation necessary to continue the existence of agencies that would otherwise sunset, if the commission recommends continuation of an agency.
Essentially, the Sunset Advisory Commission will conduct a performance review of state agencies according to the provisions and criteria of the Minnesota Sunset Act.
The advisory commission's report "make recommendations on the abolition, continuation, or reorganization of agencies, on the need for performance of the functions of the agency." In short, the commission is responsible for recommending agencies, commissions and panels should be eliminated, reorganized or continued.
King said that there are commissions and panels that the legislature can't verify how or when they were created, much less know whether they're performing the function they were created to do. This advisory commission will rectify that problem.
It will save the state money, though it's impossible to know how much until the first report comes out.
Here's the bottom line: King's reform will change government's structure by determining if an agency, commission or panel is doing its job and whether it's doing something worthwhile. The direct result of this legislation is the end of autopilot budgeting because it might result in the abolition of line items in the budget.
Congratulations, King, and congratulations to all of the GOP freshmen. Without them, these majorities, much less these reforms, wouldn't have been possible.
Posted Wednesday, July 20, 2011 5:22 AM
Comment 1 by Wolverine at 20-Jul-11 09:41 AM
Wow, so the GOP got another commission put together to see if other commissions/programs are outdated, obsolete, or needed? Will there be a commission put together in future years to judge whether the Sunset commission is outdated, obsolete, or needed? No matter how much perfume you put on this, it still has the stench of government as usual politics.
We don't have years to wait for some commission to decide if a program needs to be cut, the budget needs to be cut now. We elected this crop of republicans to cut the budget and they did nothing of the sort.
I will never vote DFL but at least when you vote for them you know what you are getting. With the GOP, it is a crap shoot.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Jul-11 02:29 PM
Wow, so the GOP got another commission put together to see if other commissions/programs are outdated, obsolete, or needed? Will there be a commission put together in future years to judge whether the Sunset commission is outdated, obsolete, or needed?While your cynicism is historically well-founded, it might've been more useful to think this through & figure out whether this commission has real teeth to it. This isn't a blue-ribbon panel of retired hacks whose goal is to have one last moment in the sun. It's made up of real legislators facing re-election.
We elected this crop of republicans to cut the budget and they did nothing of the sort.These GOP legislators were stopped from making more substantial reforms because there was a DFL governor who put catering to the DFL's special interests ahead of doing what's right for Minnesota. If you had followed them like I have, you'd know that they would've achieved a much more favorable result.
Finally, take a thoughtful look through these reforms & tell me that these legislators didn't do great work:
Reforms Included:
Pay for Performance Bonds. A pilot program to demonstrate the feasibility and desirability of using state appropriation bonds to pay for services from Non-Profit providers based on performance and outcomes. The holders of these bonds would be private sector companies and individuals who would normally separate investment and charitable activity.
Permission for Rochester which just became a first class city to use a private CPA firm as they have been doing to conduct it's audits which then will be reviewed by the State Auditor, rather than having the auditor do them (and charging for them) (Mandate relief)
Reform of the use of technology in government. Consolidating it under the Office of Enterprise Technology with the creation or modification of existing governmental organization; incorporates several important changes to the way that technology works in state government, streamlining and making government more efficient and effective, saving money down the road.
These are just a few of the reforms passed in this budget. There are many others that will have a major impact on Minnesota's budgets going forward. If you want to act like a spoiled brat because we didn't get everything you wanted, perhaps you should redouble your efforts to get a veto-proof majority elected in 2012 & electing a Republican governor elected in 2014.
Comment 2 by Joseph at 20-Jul-11 10:21 AM
Gary:
This is good news. Do you have the original bill number from session or know if it was passed during the session and vetoed by Dayton?
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 20-Jul-11 02:00 PM
The Sunset Advisory Commission was part of the first bill King submitted, HF2. HF2 was broken down for the final omnibus budget bills. The bill was passed & Gov. Dayton vetoed it.
Comment 3 by Bob J. at 20-Jul-11 12:20 PM
Wolverine, the Sunset Commission represents a proper function of the elected, meaning actual oversight of the operations of government. Were the group not specifically empowered to draft, and actually charged with, drafting legislation sunsetting wasteful government operations, I might otherwise agree with you. Given the growth of state government under Republicans (read: not conservatives) like Arne Carlson, this is a fine first step.
Comment 4 by eric z. at 20-Jul-11 02:35 PM
Pork for SCSU.
$43 million in choice cutlets.
Now we have to give King Banaian Karl Malone's old nickname, The Mailman, because he delivers.
Comment 5 by eric z. at 20-Jul-11 03:19 PM
Oink until sunset.
Comment 6 by True North Fan at 20-Jul-11 06:07 PM
Yes! Finally! A way to start reviewing state agencies.
TNF
Comment 7 by Lou DeMars at 21-Jul-11 04:10 PM
Just another way to spend more money and time for a job the legisltors should be doing. Also this will from time to time frustrate some business that are involved in the potential sunset provisions.
DFL legislators weren't profiles in productivity
One thing that's become clear in the hours following the end of the state government shutdown is that DFL legislators didn't offer many constructive ideas for fixing the budget problem. Their leadership, especially Rep. Thissen, the House Minority Leader, didn't offer an alternative budget. They only offered criticism of anything the GOP offered. A great example of the DFL's criticism is Rep. Thissen's statement released after the session:
Today, the Republicans will impose their beg-borrow-and-steal budget on the people of Minnesota.
Republicans had not 1, not 2, but 7 opportunities to agree to a better budget, a budget that actually solves the state deficit now, has the support of a vast majority of Minnesotans, and defends middle class families. Republicans could have supported the Governor's plan that cut $2 billion from state government and asked millionaires to pay their fair share.
However, the Republicans refused every single attempt at a fair budget, forcing this borrow-and-spend non-solution on the people of Minnesota in order to end a painful government shutdown.
The lengths to which this Republican majority will go to protect corporate special interests and the richest of the rich are astounding. Their budget forces the state to beg from seniors and the disabled with draconian budget cuts, borrow money to temporarily fill the deficit with one-time funds, and steal from our children's future by expanding the K12 school shift.
Minnesota loses with this budget. In 2 years, we will face another massive deficit while in the meantime middle class families will pay more and get less. The only winners today are the defenders of the unworkable status quo. The winners are the millionaires and special interests who are given yet another Republican break.
At no point during the session, during the shutdown or the special session did Rep. Thissen or other members of the DFL leadership offer a positive alternative. Their only suggestion was more. More taxes, more spending, more borrowing. The dirty little secret is that the DFL school shift would've shorted school districts more than the Republican shift will do.
By contrast, Republicans passed a long list of reforms that will reduce the size of the state workforce, bend the health care cost curve down, review government agencies to determine whether they're still serving a useful purpose, whether they should be restructured or eliminated altogether.
The list of GOP reforms is lengthy to the point that it'll take time to read through it and sort it according to impact.
Comparing the positive impact that GOP reforms will have with the DFL's nonexistent list of positive contributions is a night-and-day difference.
The only objective evaluation of the parties is that the difference in productivity is stark. It's that simple.
Originally posted Thursday, July 21, 2011, revised 22-Jul 4:28 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 21-Jul-11 08:52 AM
Gary:
What tax rate went up? Was it income tax rates? Sales tax rates? How is the middle class paying more?
The logic of the rich not paying more is an automatic tax increase on the middle class is stupid. Already AFSCME is talking about increasing taxes on the rich.
I guess they don't understand the tax income and jobs come from the rich. Do they want them to move to Wisconsin?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Jerry at 22-Jul-11 03:35 PM
Thissen must have hit a nerve.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 22-Jul-11 04:27 PM
When politicians care more about their political futures than they care about doing what's right, yes, I get more than a little upset. Thissen is a profile in political careerism.
Comment 3 by Topdog at 23-Jul-11 08:12 AM
The problem with your absolutist condemnation of the DFL legislators is that you define ANYTHING involving an increase in revenue as not a "positive alternative." What would have been a "positive alternative" to the bill to put the definition of marriage to a constitutional amendment?
Response 3.1 by Gary Gross at 23-Jul-11 11:09 AM
What would have been a 'positive alternative' to the bill to put the definition of marriage to a constitutional amendment?Never questioning the 6,000-yr-old definition of marriage in the first place.
DC Republicans: Statesmanship gambit isn't working
Yesterday, I devoted a column in Examiner.com to the question of whether DC Republicans would learn the lesson the Minnesota Republicans had learned. They haven't.
The lesson DC Republicans most desperately need to learn is that standing with the American people is absolutely essential. Last November, the American people emphatically said that they were mightily upset with DC's bailout and stimulus spending.
Now isn't the time for statesmanship. Now is the time to pull Democrats in your direction because it's where the American people are at. If Democrats want to win elections, and they certainly do, they need to change their position.
Does anyone think that Democrats wouldn't fold like a cheap suit if Republicans stood strong on the debt ceiling debate? They certainly would. The time for statesmanship is after you've won the fight. It's foolish to establish the basic parameters of the deal, then give in on several of those parameters.
Standing with the American people is important but speaking with one voice is, too. Senate Republicans didn't display discipline. Instead, they bought the media's nonsense that the American people treasure compromise more they treasure getting things right.
The American people know that spending and borrowing money at unprecedented and unsustainable levels leads us down the path to ruin. They know that because that's the path we're currently taking.
It's time we got off that path, started on a sustainable diet, then stuck with it until we've achieved our goals.
Minnesota Republicans spoke with one voice. They started a sustainable diet and they stuck with it. That's how they achieved what they'd hoped to achieve.
They've made the first downpayment, albeit not as big a downpayment as they would've liked, in creating a prosperous Minnesota.
Posted Thursday, July 21, 2011 2:35 PM
Comment 1 by Lady Logician at 21-Jul-11 11:05 PM
You are absolutely correct. The American people OVERWHELMINGLY want Cut Cap and Balance....
http://www.ladieslogic.com/component/content/article/20-president/678-all-in-favor-of-cut-cap-a-balance-say-aye.html
The GOP needs to stand with the American people - not with DC politics as usual.
LL
Comment 2 by walter hanson at 22-Jul-11 01:36 AM
Isn't amazing that when CNN asked about cut, cap, and balance over 60% of the public support it. The public is far ahead of the Democrats and unfortunately a few cowards we have in our senate minority.
Fortunatly if we win big enough in 2013 the new Repubican leadership in the senate will be Rand Paul and Rubio or Rubio and Rand Paul. I can hardly wait for that moment in 2013.
Now if we can let the United States survive the damage that Obama is going to do over the next two years.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by Bob J. at 22-Jul-11 09:13 AM
Have you read John Boehner's re-write of "Profiles in Courage"? You can read it either from front to back or from back to front.
Dayton the Reformer vs. the DFL?
There aren't alot of reporters more respected than Don Davis. That's why his interview of Gov. Dayton is so intriguing. If Gov. Dayton believes what he says he believes, he's really indicting the DFL. Here's what I'm talking about:
The stereotype is that Democratic-Farmer-Laborites defend government and hesitate making changes. Not Dayton.
During talks with Senate Ma-jority Leader Amy Koch, R-Buffalo, and House Speaker Kurt Zellers, R-Maple Grove, reform was a common topic, Dayton said. 'We brought it up again and again.'
The governor said he felt Republicans at first were skeptical that he really wants to change government. 'I reminded them, I have no investment in protecting or defending the status of state government in Minnesota...I want as much as they do to provide better service at lower costs.'
Dayton self-financed much of his governor and U.S. Senate campaigns, so he has fewer allegiances than politicians who rely on money from organizations that want to keep the status quo.
He illustrated his independence early in his term when he bucked Education Minnesota, a key DFL supporter, and backed a bill he eventually signed into law that makes it easier for mid-career professionals to become teachers.
If you've started thinking that Gov. Dayton is without political allegiances, that isn't as unthinkable as it might appear. The truth is that he's abandoned many of the DFL's traditional allies.
In fact, the final budget that Gov. Dayton signed abandons most of his most important allies. If I was one of Gov. Dayton's political allies, I'd be upset with him.
What's lost in all this is the real possibility that Gov. Dayton isn't in agreement with DFL legislators. I've written frequently that Sen. Bakk, Rep. Thissen and Rep. Winkler staunchly defended the status quo.
That isn't acceptable, especially in a TEA Party world.
Posted Saturday, July 23, 2011 11:06 AM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 24-Jul-11 12:54 AM
If Dayton was a real reformer he should have no problem supporting voter ID and shouldn't have shutdown the government at all. This is just post shutdown spin to save his legacy.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Bob J. at 24-Jul-11 07:27 AM
The Minneapolis paper carried Dayton's water throughout the shutdown. Don Davis doesn't have to be any different. I don't buy this 'reformer' business.
As Mr. Hanson points out so well, Dayton had plenty of chances to show any 'reformer' stripes he may have grown and could have started by signing the original Republican budget.
Comment 3 by IndyJones at 24-Jul-11 04:06 PM
If this were a REAL tea party moment there would be no budget increase (billions). This is the same old "same old" that merely places standard Republicans a mere 8-10 years slower at accepting the same old programs that the DFL worships.
