June 5-8, 2011
Jun 05 12:12 Bakk's Demagoguery Makes Budget Deal Difficult Jun 05 15:12 DFL's Budget Strategy: LIE LIKE HELL Jun 05 17:53 DFL Leadership: The Ends Justify the Means? Jun 06 02:21 Dave Thompson Interview Exposes Media Bias Jun 06 14:36 ABM's Smear Campaign Against King Banaian Starts Jun 08 07:04 GOP's Reforms, Gov. Dayton's Vetoes Jun 08 08:21 Is It Ignorance or Spin? Jun 08 15:49 Because It's Worked So Well Before? Jun 08 23:46 Exposing ABM's Astroturfed Budget Battle Ads
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Bakk's Demagoguery Makes Budget Deal Difficult
Friday night on Almanac, Sen. Bakk, the Senate Minority Leader, said that "Republicans haven't moved an inch since January." I'll emphatically but respectfully state that Ssen. Bakk's demagoguery makes a budget deal difficult. If Gov. Dayton, Sen. Bakk and DFL legislators don't start using verifiable facts, a budget resolution is all but impossible.
If this pattern persists, the DFL will forever poison the well.
Let's chart this chronologically, starting with the November forecast . According to the chart on pg. 5 of the November forecast, Minnesota's expected revenue for the 2012-13 biennium was $32,000,000,000.
Let's stipulate that neither the DFL or GOP would knowingly write a budget that didn't balance. That means that the GOP's initial budget would've been for either $32,000,000,000 or less. (BTW, that's your confirmation , Gov. Dayton.)
The next major step in the budgeting process is the February forecast, the final budget forecast before the end of session.According to pg. 2 of the February forecast , the revenues forecast for the 2012-13 biennium were $33,300,000,000. Also available for the 2012-13 biennium was one-time money totalling $938,000,000. Combining the two figures gives us the final forecast general fund revenue for the 2012-13 biennium. In this instance, that total is $34,268,000,000.
Simple math says that the GOP added more than $2,000,000,000 in spending to their general fund budget between the start of the session to mid-March.
Sen. Bakk chaired the Senate Tax Committee. He's a veteran legislator. There isn't a chance that he wouldn't know these statistics. The question then turns to what his motivation is for making such a provably false statement.
Since it's part of the DFL's consistent response to Republicans' growth and reform agenda, it's reasonable to assume that it's the DFL's coordinated strategy to mischaracterize the GOP as totally inflexible and unreasonable.
Let's stipulate for the sake of this discussion that both parties are inflexible in their proposals. Hypothetically speaking, the next logical step is determining what each party is inflexible about.
It's apparent that the DFL isn't willing to budge on a) whether there will be a tax increase and b) what amount of money to spend on the global budget.
By comparison, the GOP showed early in the process that they're willing to change how much they're willing to spend.
The final step in the process is to determine as best as possible which plan stands the best chance of growing Minnesota's jobs, improving Minnesota's prosperity, bringing prosperity to the biggest group of Minnesotans while giving the best incentives to entrepreneurs to put their capital at risk.
Adding billions of dollars of spending and billions of dollars in tax increases on the people who hire Minnesota's unemployed won't seem strengthen Minnesota's economy, improve Minnesota's prosperity or give Minnesota's entrepreneurs an incentive to put their capital at risk.
By comparison, reforming how big state government is and how efficiently it functions while refusing to add to Minnesotans' tax and regulatory burdens seems like a great way of strengthening Minnesota's economy while giving Minnesota's entrepreneurs an incentive to put their capital at risk.
Why put your money at risk in Minnesota if you'll be taxed at the highest rate in the nation and you'll have to jump through regulatory hoop after regulatory hoop?
The GOP plan is the one that takes Minnesota in the direction they want to go. The DFL's plan, the one that Sen. Bakk doesn't want his fingerprints on, doesn't. It's that simple.
Posted Sunday, June 5, 2011 12:12 PM
No comments.
DFL's Budget Strategy: LIE LIKE HELL
Earlier this weekend, I wrote about Sen. Bakk's distancing himself from the truth in this post . I created a timeline that proved Sen. Bakk's statements were lies. Here's what he said Friday night on Almanac:
'Republicans haven't moved an inch since January.'
I said then that I'd "emphatically but respectfully state that Sen. Bakk's demagoguery makes a budget deal difficult. If Gov. Dayton, Sen. Bakk and DFL legislators don't start using verifiable facts, a budget resolution is all but impossible." I later said that "if this pattern persists, the DFL will forever poison the well."
This morning, appearing on Esme Murphy's DFL Propaganda Hour program, Rep. Thissen said "Republicans have been stuck on the same budget since January."
It's time to take the gloves off. The DFL's pattern since the end of the session is now verified: They're repeating the same 'Republicans won't move' storyline. I used the Minnesota Department of Revenue's November budget forecast to show they were anticipating $32,000,000,000 in revenues for the 2012-13 biennium.
I then showed that this year's February forecast showed $938,000,000 in one-time income in addition to $33,330,000,000 in traditional revenue.
Obviously, Republicans didn't tell the DFL or the media that they'd spend $34,000,000,000 in January. At best, the DFL might be able to say that the only official number the GOP legislature has put forward in $34,000,000,000 but they'd have to qualify that by saying that the GOP's budget targets weren't finalized until the end of March.
We know that because that's when Sen. Cohen said that Republicans were producing the biggest budget in state history :
SEN. COHEN: We're going to be passing a budget that is billions and billions and billions and billions of dollars and at a level that we've never done before in the history of the state. The 12-13 budget will be $34.33 billions of dollars in general fund dollars taxed to the citizens of Minnesota. The 10-11 budget two years ago was $30.171 billion, I believe.
So the difference is over $4 billion, I believe. The largest state general fund budget ever, ever, ever, in the history of the state of Minnesota.
Sen. Cohen said that on March 27.
Still, the DFL leaders of the House and Senate insist, while appearing on different political talk shows on opposite ends of this weekend, that the GOP budget hasn't changed since January.
I challenge Sen. Bakk or Rep. Thissen to produce the GOP budget document, GOP memo or GOP email or video of Republicans talking from January that talks about spending $34,000,000,000 for FY2012-13. I'd bet the proverbial ranch that they can't produce that type of documentation because I'm confident it doesn't exist.
The DFL hasn't talked about how raising taxes will strengthen Minnesota's economy. The DFL hasn't talked about how raising taxes will improve Minnesota's competitiveness regionally, nationally or internationally. The DFL hasn't talked about how raising taxes will give entrepreneurs the incentive to put more of their capital at risk.
Their argument has been that "the rich aren't paying their fair share." When they aren't making that argument, they've repeatedly made the-sky-is-falling arguments.
The DFL's strategy has essentially been to a) lie about the Republicans' sticking with the same budget since January and b) predict that the sky will fall if the Republicans' budget is passed. That's been especially been true since the end of the session.
Rest assured that I'll pump the information out that a) the DFL's dishonesty is apparent and b) discredits their statements to the taking dictation media.
It's apparent that the DFL leadership's strategy is to lie like hell. They didn't have the fortitude to put out their own budget. They didn't have the fortitude to sponsor Gov. Dayton's budget. The only thing they've done is whined about Republicans' unwillingness to compromise.
I'd first argue that the a) Republicans can't compromise against the DFL's campaign themes (raising taxes and spending $39,000,000,000) and they shouldn't compromise on anything until the DFL proposes a genuine pro-growth budget that makes Minnesota more competitive and increases entrepreneurial activity.
The Republicans put together a budget that balanced, that was long on reforming government and growing Minnesota's economy and short on adding to families' tax burdens.
Until then, Republicans would be negotiating against a mirage in the desert. No thanks on that.
Originally posted Sunday, June 5, 2011, revised 26-Aug 1:32 AM
No comments.
DFL Leadership: The Ends Justify the Means?
This afternoon, I wrote this post highlighting the DFL's legislative leadership's lies. In that post, I said that Sen. Bakk said essentially the same thing Friday night that Rep. Thissen said this morning; that Republicans hadn't budged from their $34,000,000,000 budget since January.
I put together a timeline showing that the November forecast predicted $32,000,000,000 in revenue for the 2012-13 biennium. Later, I showed the February forecast predicting total general fund revenue for the 2012-13 biennium to be $34,268,000,000.
I just found this Youtube of Rep. Thissen singing a totally different song earlier this session:
TRANSCRIPT:
Graphics on screen: March 28, 2011: Rep. Thissen points out the GOP compromised on spending by passing a $34 billion budget:
THISSEN: You are already spending more, probably close to $2,000,000,000 more than you said you would last fall or even as this session started. That is the truth plain and simple.
For a brief period of time in late March, the DFL criticized Republicans for not sticking with their original $32,000,000,000 figure. DFL legislator after DFL legislator said that the GOP wasn't keeping their campaign promise.
The DFL was wrong. The GOP didn't break their campaign promise because the GOP promise was to not raise taxes and to only spend the money that was in the general fund checkbook.
The $32,000,000,000 figure was just the amount of money that the Minnesota Department of Revenue forecast in their November, 2010 forecast. The GOP used that figure as a starting point, subject to the February forecast.
This morning, Rep. Thissen told WCCO's Esme Murphy that 'Republicans have been stuck on the same budget since January.' I'd ask that the honest Rep. Thissen please stand up but it's apparent that the March 28,2011 Rep. Thissen was telling the truth. This morning's Rep. Thissen was lying through his teeth.
Minnesotans deserve honest, principled leadership that tells the truth, sets the right priorities and passes a budget that strengthens Minnesota's economy and eliminates the deficit without raising taxes.
The last thing Minnesotans need are lying politicians who won't hesitate a split-second to lie in order to win this fight. What's particularly disturbing is that the budget that the DFL is lying about won't make Minnesota's economy stronger. It'll just make Minnesota's government bigger.
No thanks.
Originally posted Sunday, June 5, 2011, revised 06-Jun 2:35 AM
No comments.
Dave Thompson Interview Exposes Media Bias
During Esme Murphy's interview with State Sen. Dave Thompson, Murphy's bias was exposed in this question:
In terms of revenue projections for the state, there are indications that we could be headed into a double-dip recession. Are you concerned looking forward at that that there's gonna have to be additional revenues provided to the state as the governor has argued?
For a moment, I thought Sen. Thompson's response was going to cause Murphy to have a nervous breakdown. Here's Sen. Thompson's reply:
Well, you know Esme, that cuts both ways. I would make the opposite argument, that if we're worried about our revenues in the future, let's certainly not be spending more. If we're truly concerned by this, and yes I am because I'm a believer that the Obama economic policies are taking us right back into that ditch that he likes to talk about, I am concerned about that. If you think you're gonna take a cut in your income at home, you look at ways to reduce your spending. So I'll accept their premise. This economy is hanging by a thread so, if anything, let's hold back spending further to not dig any deeper holes.
The thought that people, not government, should have first dibs on the money they earned apparently didn't cross Murphy's mind. Her first priority was that government be properly funded.
If a topnotch polling company, like the KSTP-SUSA, Rasmussen's or Peter Hart's, were to poll whether government or the people who earned the money should have first dibs on their money, I'm betting that 90+ percent of the people would say the people who earned the money should have first dibs, especially during a recession.
Sen. Thompson acquitted himself well in the interview. When Murphy asked about what types of responses he was getting in his district, he said that people "who haven't been paying attention" to the budget battle hear that they're actually spending about the same as this biennium, most of them are ok with that.
That said, it's obvious that the "all-cuts budget" line is effective. I attribute that to the DFL's willingness to lie and the media's willingness to let them get away with it.
If people don't remember anything else, I'd hope people would recognize the media's bias is a major part of the DFL's corruption. By not challenging the DFL's lies, they're allowing the DFL to engage in the most disgusting type of corruption imaginable.
It's the media's job to make sure politicians don't get away with telling whoppers. During her interview with Rep. Thissen, Murphy didn't question his characterization of the GOP's budget as an all-cuts budget.
Someone like Chris Wallace would've made that one of his first questions. He would've caused his guest to explain how it's possible to cut your way to the biggest budget in Minnesota history. Good luck with explaining that.
Posted Monday, June 6, 2011 2:21 AM
No comments.
ABM's Smear Campaign Against King Banaian Starts
I've expected ABM would target their attacks towards Rep. Banaian because they view him as vulnerable. This video verifies that belief:
The script is typical DFL class warfare stuff:
Rep. Banaian's plan balances our state's budget on the backs of the middle class so the richest two percent of Minnesotans who live in his district will not have to pay their fair share of taxes. Rep. Banaian voted to cut millions of dollars for services the middle class relies on, like hospitals. He also cut millions from local government aid, meaning property taxes for the middle class will continue to rise.
$25,686,529 Amount Rep. Banaian voted to cut from area hospitals
$5,190,868 Amount Rep. Banaian voted to cut from area local government aid
OR
162 people in the richest two percent would pay their fair share under Gov. Dayton's plan.
In these tough economic times, we need to call on Rep. Banaian to protect the middle class, not the 162 top income earners in his district.
The first lie is that Rep. Banaian cut anything. He voted to not increase the HHS budget as much as the DFL's special interest allies wanted it increased. The next lie is that he cut LGA on anyone except on St. Paul, Minneapolis and Duluth. Every other city's LGA stays the same.
The attempted dovetail that these imaginary LGA cuts lead to higher property taxes is a failure, too. That's been discredited time after time. Still, the DFL insists on repeating this lie. Dayton's staffers testified that property taxes still might right increase even if the leigslature increased LGA. Other cities haven't raised property taxes even though they don't get LGA.
It's progressive orthodoxy to think that there's a direct correlation between LGA cuts and property tax increases. LGA doesn't cause property tax increases. Reckless spending habits cause property tax increases.
Let's dispel another progressive myth. The people that ABM and progressives call "the rich" aren't rich. People like Vance Opperman and the Daytons are rich. They're the ones who've got their money hidden in trust funds.
The 162 people that ABM intentionally mischaracterizes as "the rich" are entrepreneurs who put their capital at risk while employing thousands of people. The truly rich wouldn't be affected one iota by Gov. Dayton's tax increases.
What ABM isn't telling the middle class is that Gov. Dayton's tax increases won't strengthen minnesota's economy, won't improve Minnesota's competitiveness regionally, nationally or internationally, won't spread prosperity and won't trigger increased entrepreneurial activity.
Gov. Dayton's tax increases will only improve the lives of the governing class. This isn't about the middle class; it's about the public employee unions.
The legislation that Rep. Banaian chief-authored this session reform and downsize government. HF2 includes a sunset commission that will vaporize commissions and agencies that aren't useful anymore.
It's predictable that ABM goes after King for another reason. King's legislation isn't friendly to overbloated government, isn't taxpayer friendly or isn't efficient in delivering needed services.
Finally, it isn't unreasonable to think that ABM is worried King will have a positive impact on making Minnesota more prosperous by using conservative principles.
Posted Monday, June 6, 2011 2:36 PM
No comments.
GOP's Reforms, Gov. Dayton's Vetoes
When Gov. Dayton vetoed the 9 budget bills, I knew that he'd killed many key reforms that would've improved Minnesotans' lives. I just didn't know it was this many. Let's start with the reforms in the Education Bill (HF934):
To encourage excellence and hard work that produces measurable accomplishment, the bill grants scholarships to high school students who graduate ahead of time and enter college or military service. The bill also establishes Literacy Incentive Aid, which is earned by schools based on elementary reading test scores.
Cost control at the local level is achieved by disallowing teacher strikes over compensation issues when the school district is already offering a percentage increase equivalent to what has been received by the district in new basic revenue.
Several state mandates are repealed or greatly scaled-back in response to locally elected school boards requesting more ability to control their districts.
The next biggest budget item is the HHS budget (SF760). This isn't a reform but it's worth noting:
Overall increase in funding for nursing homes of $57 million for FY 12-13 , which is more than the Governor's budget increases funding for nursing facilities, as well as a small rate increase for rural facilities. Gov's budget increase for nursing facilities is only $ 11.7 million, and he does not include the rate increase for rural facilities .
That's pretty good for an all-cuts budget, isn't it? Next, here's the reforms:
Real reforms of MinnesotaCare and Medical Assistance Programs that are growing at an unsustainable rate. With out the reforms and reductions, Medical Assistance is forecasted to increase by $3 billion for FY 12-13. There is still a 10 percent increase in the MA program, even with the reforms and reductions.
Reforms and cost saving measures such as Medicaid fraud prevention, nursing facility rate equalization phase out, county human services streamlining, and county human service delivery authority reform (allowing counties to join together to administer human services).
Gov. Dayton should be ashamed of himself for vetoing these bills. The DFL of themselves for not supporting more of these reforms.
The DFL talks mightily about the Republicans' all-cuts budget but this is proof that their words were more spin than reality. Sen. Bakk and Rep. Thissen got alot of mileage out of that phrase. So did Rep. Winkler.
This information proves that they weren't telling the truth.
Posted Wednesday, June 8, 2011 7:04 AM
No comments.
Is It Ignorance or Spin?
When I read Mary Lahammer's MinnPost post , one of the first questions I had was whether Rep. Ryan Winkler's schtick is spin or ignorance. Here's the context:
After Governor Mark Dayton vetoed a bill to require photo identification to vote, Republican lawmakers plan to put the issue on the ballot. Constitutional amendments don't need the governor's signature to go directly to Minnesota voters. Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer (R-Big Lake) said "The legislation has overwhelming public support especially among our younger voters and women. Clearly this is what Minnesota wants.' State Senator Scott Newman (R-Hutchinson) is the co-author of the bill that would put a voter ID question on the 2012 ballot.
A recent poll showed overwhelming support :
Age demographics - The lowest level of support in age groups comes from seniors, who back voter ID 69/23. The best support comes, surprisingly, from the youngest voters (18-34YOs) at 82/12.
Party affiliation - Yes, 92% of Republicans support voter ID. So do 76% of independents : and 59% of those wingnutty Democrats in Minnesota, too. Among Tea Party 'members,' voter ID enjoys 93% support. And for those who don't identify with the Tea Party, support plummets all the way to : 74%. Along ideological lines, liberals were least likely to support it - at 67%, the second-lowest level of support among all demographics.
Education - Surely, support must be coming from the mouthbreathers, right? High-school graduates give a 79% level of support, almost the same as the 78% among those with some college education. Those with degrees are a little more discerning : at 75%.
Income level - It won't be much of a surprise to know that those making six figures support voter ID 73/25. It will be a surprise to Dayton to find that those making less than $50K per year support it even more, 78/14.
Region - Like all of the other demographics, there isn't much difference between the Twin Cities demo (76/19) and the rural area of western Minnesota (81/15). In each region, support is at 75% or higher.
This is wildly popular across the state and with every demographic group imaginable. This is a no-brainer for non-politicians. Here's what Rep. Winkler said in reaction to the constitutional question legislation:
"And just like the anti-marriage amendment, they want to change our state's constitution just to restrict basic rights of Minnesotans. This helps not one Minnesota family. Worse, it is a counterproductive distraction to resolving our budget deficit when time is of the essence."
The last I checked, neither Rep. Kiffmeyer nor Sen. Newman are part of the budget negotiations. That begs the question of how Rep. Kiffmeyer's and Sen. Newman's press conference distracts from anything happening in St. Paul.
As for Rep. Winkler's claim that this proposed constitutional amendment will restrict Minnesotans' basic rights, this is part of the DFL's talking points.
Posted Wednesday, June 8, 2011 8:21 AM
No comments.
Because It's Worked So Well Before?
Robert Borosage's op-ed in this morning's USA Today is laughable. It's also proof that this administration's economic strategy is a one-trick pony:
We can't cut our way to prosperity. The best deficit reduction program is to put people back to work. With corporations sitting on more than $1 trillion in cash waiting for customers, more tax breaks won't help. Americans, struggling with rising costs, stagnant wages, and declining home values, are tightening their belts. It is time for government to act.
We should take advantage of low interest rates to finance rebuilding America's infrastructure, increasing our global competitiveness and putting people to work. We should be expanding, not cutting, investments in education, innovation and new energy vital to our future.
Create a "green corps" in every region, hiring the young to retrofit buildings, providing hope while saving energy. Challenge China and mercantilist nations, move to balance our trade, and revive manufacturing in America. And we need to empower workers to gain a fair share of the profits they help generate, while curbing Wall Street's casino and creating incentives for Main Street investment.
Let's start with the notion that government isn't doing enough. The reality is that they've heaped so much regulation onto American businesses, from the smallest of small businesses to the biggest of multi-national corporations, that investment analysts are saying that capital is on strike. That capital won't end that strike until they know the extent of Obamacare's and Dodd-Frank's regulations.
That's the biggest reason Republicans have for repealing Obamacare, though that isn't the only reason. Other reasons include the fact that Obamacare is unconstitutional, it doesn't shrink health care costs and it puts IPAB in charge of Medicare price controls.
I'd further argue that Mr. Borosage isn't being realistic about increasing global competitiveness if this administration insists on implementing Obamacare. The two items are mutually exclusive. I'd further argue that the unwritten, oft-speculated about regulations to the Dodd-Frank Act hinder U.S. competitiveness.
Put succinctly, this administration has repeatedly acted against the things it's advocated for with words .
Finally, it's painfully obvious that increased governmental tinkering in the economy isn't welcomed by America's job creators. It's only welcomed by this administration's control freak bureaucrats.
Posted Wednesday, June 8, 2011 3:49 PM
No comments.
Exposing ABM's Astroturfed Budget Battle Ads
I've reviewed ABM's ads against Republican legislators. I can say without hesitation that they're the first set of astroturfed ads against any group of elected officials I've ever seen. In the interest of full disclosure, two of the ads are against legislators that represent me and that I've enthusiastically supported, Rep. King Banaian and State Sen. John Pederson.
Here's the ad against King:
Here's the transcript from that 30 second spot:
Unidentified man:How we solve our state budget problem will say alot about our values.
Young couple: Rep. Banaian is choosing to balance the budget on the backs of the middle class...
Young African-American woman: ...with drastic cuts to education and health care
Construction worker: And his plan will eliminate jobs and increase our property taxes...
Young white woman: All so the richest 2% don't have to chip in.
Young mom: Gov. Dayton's plan will protect the middle class...
Young couple: and 98% of Minnesotans won't have a tax increase.
Voice-Over: Tell Rep. Banaian to stand up for the middle class.
Here's the ad against Sen. Pederson:
Here's the transcript from the spot:
Unidentified man:How we solve our state budget problem will say alot about our values.
Young couple: Sen. Pederson is choosing to balance the budget on the backs of the middle class...
Young African-American woman: ...with drastic cuts to education and health care.
Construction worker: And his plan will eliminate jobs and increase our property taxes...
Young white woman: All so the richest 2% don't have to chip in.
Young mom: Gov. Dayton's plan will protect the middle class...
Young couple: and 98% of Minnesotans won't have a tax increase.
Voice-Over: Tell Sen. Pederson to stand up for the middle class.
I thought about the possibility that that these were consistuents of King's and John's. That's why I checked out ABM's ad against Rep. Davids. Here's ABM's ad against Rep. Davids:
Here's the transcript from ABM's ad against Rep. Davids:
Unidentified man:How we solve our state budget problem will say alot about our values.
Young couple: Rep. Davids is choosing to balance the budget on the backs of the middle class...
Young African-American woman: ...with drastic cuts to education and health care.
Construction worker: And his plan will eliminate jobs and increase our property taxes...
Young white woman: All so the richest 2% don't have to chip in.
Young mom: Gov. Dayton's plan will protect the middle class...
Young couple: and 98% of Minnesotans won't have a tax increase.
Voice-Over: Tell Rep. Davids to stand up for the middle class.
ABM's ads feature the same people reciting the exact same lines in exactly the same sequence. They hammer home the exact same discredited message.
This is astroturfing at its worst.
First, the priorities are mixed up. Yes, Minnesota's constitution mandates that the legislature pass a balanced budget and that the governor sign that budget into law. What I mean by ABM's priorities being mixed up is that ABM's first priority is whether "the richest 2%" pay their fair share.
The GOP legislature's first priority is balancing the budget, partially by setting smart priorities, partially by reforming how state government operates, partially by growing the economy.
To the DFL: That's the true definition of a balanced approach to balancing the budget.
Here are the questions I haven't heard ABM answer:
1. How does raising taxes on Minnesota's job creators help Minnesota's middle class?
2. Considering the fact that the top decile pays 56% of Minnesota's state income taxes , what justification is there to suggest that "the top 2%" aren't chipping in?
3. What proof is there that property taxes are directly influenced by income tax rates, especially the tax rates of "the top 2%"?
4. How will raising taxes on "the richest 2%" strengthen Minnesota's economy?
Gov. Dayton's budget, the one that DFL legislators orphaned , won't strengthen Minnesota's economy. It won't reduce property taxes. In fact, when Minnesota's economy heads further south, Gov. Dayton and DFL legislators will support raising taxes on the top 5%, not the top 2%. It won't dawn on them that the way to getting Minnesota heading in the right direction isn't possible without a significant reform agenda.
That reform agenda would eliminate a sizeable portion of Minnesota's regulations and change how government operates. That reform agenda wouldn't treat entrepreneurs like they were culprits.
ABM's ad campaign isn't about these legislators. It's about their spending tons of money on propping up Gov. Dayton's orphaned, discredited budget.
Posted Wednesday, June 8, 2011 11:46 PM
No comments.
