June 9-12, 2011
Jun 09 11:17 Another Obama Promise Broken Jun 09 21:04 Strib Turns On Gov. Dayton's K-12 Veto Jun 10 04:56 Will Gov. Dayton Shut Down MnDOT? Jun 10 06:53 DFL Council Rejects Mining Leases Jun 10 13:11 Hentges' Holier-Than-Thou Diatribe Jun 10 22:56 Hann Challenges Dayton Administration Jun 11 10:36 The Real Race Taking Shape Jun 12 12:09 Dayton's Shutdown Was Pre-planned Jun 12 01:45 Wisconsin Tactics Visit Minnesota
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Another Obama Promise Broken
I've said for quite some time that President Obama couldn't keep his biggest health care promise. I've known awhile that people could keep their health care plans even if they liked them. This article cites a report that proves I'm right:
What the report shows, said Energy and Commerce Health panel member Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), is that "what President Obama promised during the healthcare, that if you liked your health insurance plan you'd be able to keep it, is really not true. That is an unkept promise."
The Obama administration responded with a post on the White House blog calling the report, from McKinsey & Company, an "outlier."
"The study misses some key points," wrote Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy-Ann DeParle, "and doesn't provide the complete picture about how the Affordable Care Act will strengthen the health care system and make it easier for employers to offer high quality coverage to their employees."
Ms. DeParle isn't addressing Rep. McMorris-Rogers' claim. Rep. McMorris-Rogers cited President Obama's promise that people who wanted to keep their plan will get to keep their plan. Further, Ms. DeParle isn't telling the truth. She's offering a White House talking point that isn't based in fact.
This article , written by Grace-Marie Turner, studied the McKinsey Quarterly report. Here's what she wrote:
Before the health law passed, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that only nine million to 10 million people, or about 7% of employees who currently get health insurance at work, would switch to government-subsidized insurance. But the McKinsey survey of 1,300 employers across industries, geographies and employer sizes found "that reform will provoke a much greater response" and concludes that the health overhaul law will lead to a "radical restructuring" of job-based health coverage.
Another McKinsey analyst, Alissa Meade, told a meeting of health-insurance executives last November that "something in the range of 80 million to 100 million individuals are going to change coverage categories in the two years" after the insurance mandates take effect in 2014.
This isn't surprising. It's cheaper for the companies to drop coverage and pay the fine than to continue offering health insurance. Since businesses are into making profits, wasn't this result foreseeable? That's why the fine wasn't bigger.
Had the goal been to keep people in their plans, the fines would've been stiffer or the individual mandate wouldn't have been part of the bill's language.
This will change the cost to the government. DRAMATICALLY:
In a study last year, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former director of the Congressional Budget Office, estimated that an additional 35 million workers would be moved out of employer plans and into subsidized coverage, and that this would add about $1 trillion to the total cost of the president's health law over the next decade. McKinsey's survey implies that the cost to taxpayers could be significantly more.
The McKinsey study, "How US health care reform will affect employee benefits," predicts that employers will either drop coverage altogether, offer defined contributions for insurance, or offer coverage only to certain employees. The study concludes that 30% of employers overall will definitely or probably stop offering health insurance to their workers. However, among employers with a high awareness of the health-reform law, this proportion increases to more than 50%.
The taxpayers' cost for Obamacare would increase by $1,000,000,000,000 if 35,000,000 workers were dropped from employer-provided health insurance. If 80,000,000 workers were dropped, that taxpayer subsidy would jump to $2,200,000,000,000 for the next decade.
That far exceeds the original CBO figure.
We shouldn't be surprised that Obamacare costs more than CBO said it would. Let's remember that we're dealing with an administration whose predictions of the stimulus were badly wrong.
Posted Thursday, June 9, 2011 11:17 AM
No comments.
Strib Turns On Gov. Dayton's K-12 Veto
It's a rare day that the Strib takes a liberal governor to the woodshed so it's best to enjoy it while it's still possible. This post does precisely that. Included in the post is some vintage spin. First things first:
In his letter vetoing the Republican K-12 budget, Dayton criticized the bill's 'freezing of compensatory revenue.' The state doles out that money, sometimes more than $400 million a year, based on the number of poor students in each school district.
But there's one problem. Dayton and the Republicans both want spend the same amount on compensatory revenue over the next two years. Each side proposes leaving it at levels set in current law.
Senate Republicans once proposed freezing compensatory revenue, but that provision was eliminated when lawmakers crafted the final version of the K-12 bill (known as the 'conference report').
What Republicans did instead was separate the compensatory revenue from the basic per-pupil formula allowance. That means future Legislatures will have to specifically increase the compensatory revenue formula, rather than just boosting the basic formula.
Is that a freeze?
'How on God's green earth do you argue that it's a freeze?' said Rep. Pat Garofalo, R-Farmington, the Republican sponsor of the bill. He noted that not only have Dayton and the GOP both left the formula at current law levels, but spending will also increase automatically if there are more poor students.
At first, Department of Education spokeswoman Charlene Briner agreed the letter got it wrong.
'It is incorrect to say that compensatory was frozen in the conference report,' Briner said in an interview. Soon after, Briner sent Hot Dish e-mails backtracking that statement and adding 'I think I was incorrect to say that.'
'The net effect is a freeze,' she wrote, 'unless future legislatures act.' In other words, delinking it from the basic formula could mean future legislatures choose not to increase the compensatory revenue formula.
First, it's foolish to think that Gov. Dayton would veto his own K-12 proposal. That won't happen, if for no other reason than Gov. Dayton's ego would prevent it.
Next, it's flimsy at best to argue that something is a freeze based on what future legislatures do. It isn't constitutionally possible to tie a future legislature's hands. (NOTE: That's what's laughable about the budget deficit/budget tail conversation. The 2009-10 legislature can't dictate what the 2011-12 legislature will do.)
Not willing to let an embarrassing moment die a slow, painful death, the Dayton administration kept it alive:
Dayton spokeswoman Katie Tinucci said they stand by the veto letter. 'It is our interpretation that the effect of delinking compensatory revenue is the same as freezing it - we cannot rely on the actions of future legislatures.'
I don't know why Gov. Dayton hired Ms. Tinucci if she's this utterly clueless about the budget process. The question I'm left with is whether she's totally clueless or if she's just defending a foolish boss. One thing that's certain is that Rep. Pat Garofalo knows what he's talking about:
Garofalo says that is a dishonest argument, noting that both sides are relying on future legislatures to increase formulas.
'They can't possibly argue it's a freeze,' Garofalo said.
Each day, Gov. Dayton's statements reveal either a high level of dishonesty in his veto letters. They're supposed to explain why appropriations or policies in the vetoed bill led to the governor's veto.
Gov. Dayton's veto letter doesn't provide a credible reason for his veto. If anything, Minnesotans who've read Gov. Dayton's K-12 veto letter are left with more questions than answers.
From Gov. Dayton to Ms. Tinucci to Ms. Briner, this administration is the present day personification of the Not Yet Ready For Primetime Players . They can't even their stories straight on something this straightforward.
Posted Thursday, June 9, 2011 9:04 PM
No comments.
Will Gov. Dayton Shut Down MnDOT?
Based on a conversation I had Thursday and Mark Sommerhauser's article in the SC Times , I'm adopting a pessimistic attitude towards Gov. Dayton. I'm convinced that Gov. Dayton's first priority is shutting government down. Here's the DFL's spin on the situation:
MnDOT referred questions about how a shutdown might affect the projects to Minnesota Management & Budget, the state's financial and human-resources agency. It's also overseeing much of the planning for a possible shutdown.
Management & Budget spokesman John Pollard said little will be known about whether the projects can proceed until after a potential court ruling is made, perhaps later this month.
Such a ruling could determine which state services and funding sources are considered essential, and thus would continue after a shutdown, and which are nonessential, and would stop.
'We really don't know the answer until the courts rule,' Pollard said.
This is pure BS. The courts only have jurisdiction if relevant omnibus bills aren't signed. I'm not arguing that the relevant bill isn't signed. I agree that the Transportation bill was vetoed. What I'm arguing is that Gov. Dayton vetoed it without justification.
Thursday afternoon, House Transportation Committee Chairman Mike Beard confirmed that the vast majority of the Transportation Bill is funded with dedicated funds.
Gov. Dayton's veto letter states that he vetoed the Transportation bill because it didn't include enough general fund money to fund transit. That's nonsense. The amounts specified make up a tiny percentage of MnDOT's budget.
I can't take Gov. Dayton's veto letter seriously in light of the fact that Gov. Dayton apparently thinks that the Transportation budget shouldn't be cut. Then there's this:
On top of the impacts listed above, the State Government bill, also includes items that impact transportation agencies negatively. A 15%reduction inpersonnel for MnDOT, in addition to the 400 employees taking early retirement in fiscal year 2011, will result in a potentially serious loss of institutional knowledge. It will have an unacceptable impact on service levels in key functions like engineering, highway maintenance, and delivery of construction programs of around $1 billion per year.
TRANSLATION: Reductions in the size of government aren't acceptable to Gov. Dayton.
While Minnesota families struggle with decisions on what they'll cut, Gov. Dayton apparently thinks it's too big an imposition to ask government to make difficult decisions.
The 15% cut is a red herring. Rep. Keith Downey's 15 By 15 bill would reduce the state workforce by 15% by the end of 2015. According to testimony given in the House State Government Finance Committee, this will easily be met by retirements. It isn't calling for an immediate cut of 15% of MnDOT's workforce this year.
If these projects are delayed, it will be because Gov. Dayton has made a purely political calculation that his shutting state government down is the only way the DFL can retake the legislature. He'll find out the hard way that his take-the-state-hostage strategy won't work.
Gov. Dayton is fighting hard to make sure government isn't cut. He isn't fighting to build a strengthened Minnesota economy. While it's true that he signed Dan Fabian's HF1 bill, it's equally true to say that Gov. Dayton isn't fighting for streamlining government.
The choice facing Minnesotans couldn't be clearer. Voting for a DFL legislator is voting for giving Gov. Dayton the final say in dictating how big government will be. Electing Republicans will send Gov. Dayton the message that he'll need to change his governing strategy or be a one-term wonder.
Then again, the governor who throws a hissy fit in vetoing a Transportation bill that doesn't hold MnDOT harmless isn't fit for office anyway.
Posted Friday, June 10, 2011 4:56 AM
No comments.
DFL Council Rejects Mining Leases
I was stunned and disgusted when I read this article from Twin Cities Business. Here's what disgusted me:
A council that includes Governor Mark Dayton and other state leaders reportedly sent back 77 mineral lease packages to the Department of Natural Resources, stating that the agency hadn't taken sufficient measures to notify landowners of interest in mining under their land.
Minnesota's Executive Council on Wednesday voted 5 to 0 to kick back 77 mineral leases to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), marking the first time in nearly three decades that the council hasn't approved a DNR lease package, according to a report by the Duluth News Tribune.
The Executive Council - which comprises Governor Mark Dayton, Lieutenant Governor Yvonne Prettner Solon, Attorney General Lori Swanson, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, and Auditor Rebecca Otto - meets each quarter to make decisions related to real estate and investments.
The council voted to postpone the lease agreements between the DNR and mining companies, stating that the DNR hadn't taken sufficient measures to notify landowners of interest in mining under their land.
That this collection of DFL diehards voted against growing Minnesota's economy isn't unexpected. It's just disgusting. As a direct result of their vote, mining projects will now be subjected to additional delays on top of the lengthy delays mining companies already deal with.
This paragraph really frosts me:
Mining supporters contend that the leases are a necessary step toward accessing Minnesota's untapped minerals and creating jobs, especially as some companies have announced plans to begin the first-ever nonferrous mining, the mining of copper, nickel, and other precious metals, in northern Minnesota.
Gov. Dayton and his DFL rubberstamps didn't consider the fact that people are hurting because of militant environmentalists have stopped mining in its tracks. This decision shouldn't surprise anyone since these militant environmentalists are Gov. Dayton's political allies. Paul Aasen, for instance, moved from filing one lawsuit after another that eventually killed the Big Stone II project as leader of MCEA to being Gov. Dayton's MPCA Commissioner. (Rumor has it that Aasen was actually Alida Messinger's, Dayton's ex-wife's pick but that's another story.)
This is just further proof that this administration is a wholly owned subsidiary of the DFL's special interest allies. This isn't governance of, by and for the people. It's governance of, by and for the DFL's special interest allies.
In both 2012 and 2014, voters will have stark contrasts and clear choices. Choosing a DFL candidate is a vote for killing Minnesota's economy and growing Minnesota's government beyond what can be sustained. Supporting GOP candidates is supporting candidates whose highest priority is getting Minnesota's economy jumpstarted and running efficiently.
This vote also is a warning sign to potential investors. That warning sign says 'Investors, job creation aren't welcome here.'
Posted Friday, June 10, 2011 6:53 AM
No comments.
Hentges' Holier-Than-Thou Diatribe
When last I was forced to pay attention to him, Bruce Hentges was running against my state senator, John Pederson. Since then, Hentges returned to vote for a massive property tax increase that people are still fuming about.
This morning, the St. Cloud Times published this LTE written by Mr. Hentges. It's fair to describe Hentges' LTE as an holier-than-thou diatribe. Here's what I'm talking about:
The marriage amendment, authored by Rep. Steve Gottwalt, is a bad idea that unjustly singles out people be treated differently than the majority. It does so even though most Fortune 500 corporations in Minnesota have recognized gay partners in health care and other benefits.
The Jewish and Christian faiths have agreed with Rep. Gottwalt's position the past 5,000+ years. Based on that reality, isn't it accurate to say that Rep. Gottwalt's position is in keeping with the vast majority of recorded history?
If companies want to offer the same health care benefits to everyone, that's their business. It isn't their business, however, to define what is or isn't marriage.
Mr. Hentges didn't stop there. Instead, Hentges suggests that Rep. Gottwalt and the church are the hatemongers. That's laughable considering the fact that the gay rights activists spat on Rod Hamilton as he walked the hallway outside the House Chamber to the elevator:
What became unnerving was that last night as we moved closer to the vote they got louder and faster. There was one woman who screeched every time the main doors opened. Made me long for a pair of socks. It was an experience I will remember a long time. Especially seeing the backs of the state troopers-as they lined up shoulder to shoulder to keep the crowd from touching us. And the screaming, 'Shame! Shame!' at us. Doesn't really go with earlier in the evening when they were singing Amazing Grace, and shouting 'No Hate'. Of course, they seemed to think it was perfectly loving to scream 'Bigot' 10 inches from my face and spit on one of the other reps. (By the way, he has MS, walks with a cane and is a little slower. No hate, right?
Let's be abundantly clear about this. The gay rights activists that gathered in the Capitol that night displayed some of the most despicable attitudes I've ever seen. They should be ashamed of themselves but they aren't.
After his opening temper tantrum, Hentges then pretends that he's a Biblical scholar. Suffice it to say that Mr. Hentges needs more classes at divinity school before he's a competent Biblical scholar. Here's what gives it away:
It also disappoints me that the Catholic Church, which last fall sent out DVDs opposing gay marriage, now remains silent on the drastic cuts to services for the poor and vulnerable in our state. Where is the DVD attacking these cuts to services for the vulnerable and the unequal distribution of wealth in this state?
Now Mr. Hentges is lecturing the Catholic church because they aren't on his side in this fight? What gives with that?
By the time Mr. Hentges finishes his published diatribe, he's risen to the level of lecturing Jesus:
I wonder what position Jesus would really take on these issues.
On the issue of gay marriage, I'm 100% certain that He'd vehemently oppose it. On the issue of redistributing wealth through the government, I'm certain that He'd oppose that, too. I'm confident of it because Christ's instructions weren't given to government. They were given to people and churches.
I'd be surprised if Mr. Hentges doesn't challenge Sen. Pederson again in 2012. That said, I'd be very surprised if, if that's the matchup, Sen. Pederson wouldn't win that seat by a bigger margin than he won by in 2010.
Posted Friday, June 10, 2011 1:11 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 15-Jun-11 08:48 AM
100% certain. Gary, Gary, Gary.
He asks a reasonable question.
You give an answer for Jesus.
Who voted you into being spokesman for Jesus?
Think about it.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Jun-11 09:14 AM
Hentges questions might sound reasonable if you haven't read the Bible. Once you've read it, though, it's pretty obvious Mr. Hentges is exceptionally ignorant.
Hann Challenges Dayton Administration
David Hann is one of the smartest legislators in St. Paul. He routinely gets re-elected in what would otherwise be a swing district. As such, when he says something, it's worth the time to listen. Pay attention to Sen. Hann's challenge to the Dayton administration in this video:
Here's the line that caught my attention:
Now you testified the other day that in you, in your analysis, using some sort of dynamic figuring, can figure out that when we do certain things at the state level, then local jurisdictions are going to decide on their own to raise taxes. Although, on your chart here, it shows that property taxes have gone up every year since 1995 and I don't think Republican budgets have been passed every year since 1995.
It's painfully obvious to thoughtful people that the DFL's claims linking LGA with property tax increases are nonsense. In fact, Mitch's post does a fantastic job of exposing LGA myths:
The top 14 cities in terms of Local Government Aid - Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Duluth, Saint Cloud, Winona, Hibbing, Austin, Moorhead, Mankato, Rochester, Faribault, Albert Lea, New Ulm and Virginia - do indeed soak up over half of the state's entire LGA budget.
More interestingly, the top thirty cities in population - from Minneapolis (population 390131) down through Brooklyn Center (30330) get a grand total of about 172 million dollars from LGA.
But twenty of the top thirty cities - Bloomington, Brooklyn Park, Plymouth, Eagan, Eden Prairie, Burnsville, Maple Grove, Woodbury, Blaine, Lakeville, Minnetonka, Apple Valley, Edina, Saint Louis Park, Maplewood, Roseville, Cottage Grove, Shakopee, Inver Grove Heights and Andover, receive absolutely no local government aid.
In other words, the DFL can't prove their LGA-property tax allegations if their lives depended on it. The DFL will blame everyone except their irresponsible mayors for higher property taxes.
If mayors and city councils don't hesitate in spending money beyond their city's means, then their citizens should pay for their recklessness. The rest of the state shouldn't subsidize these cities' irresponsible spending habits.
It's never wise to reward foolish behavior. Too often, that's what LGA is.
Sen. Hann is exactly right in calling the DFL for their playing fast and loose with the truth. The Twin Cities' media didn't investigate whether the DFL's allegations had merit. That's why that responsibility was left to Sen. Hann.
Thankfully, Sen. Hann was totally capable of explaining that LGA isn't tied to rising property taxes.
Posted Friday, June 10, 2011 10:56 PM
Comment 1 by eric z at 11-Jun-11 07:39 AM
Those top numbers - are they in terms of dollars per capita, or dollars total, that list being a list of the larger Minnesota municipalities? Do you know? It seems a fundamental thing to pin down before pontificating.
When you say "Mitch's post" I presume it's Berg, and hence not worth the time of looking at it.
Not something to say here. We disagree often, Gary, agree sometimes, but it is helpful to my understandings of a range of things to see your posts.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 11-Jun-11 10:18 AM
First, saying that Mitch Berg's research into LGA isn't "worth the time of looking at it" is exceptionally close-minded. Unlike many inhabitants of the lefty think tanks, Mitch isn't afraid to go wherever the information leads.
Next, the top dollars are dollars total.
Comment 2 by eric z at 11-Jun-11 08:05 AM
I have a problem with, "In other words, the DFL can't prove their LGA-property tax allegations if their lives depended on it."
That's a fundamentally flawed argument.
You say they cannot prove the future.
Okay, wise guy. Prove them WRONG.
To say nobody has an unimpeachable crystal ball is true but uninformative. To say it with a one-sided slant in proposing an argument is illogical.
That unimpeachable crystal balls do not exist is not any basis to go on to, "The DFL will blame everyone except their irresponsible mayors for higher property taxes."
I blame a mayor for not increasing the tax rate, but for wasting reserves in multi-million dollar chunks; one sunk already in purchasing land to compete with private sector land development in the metro area. Another proposed to bankroll a dubious building venture on the land venture site.
That would be competing with private sector banking, where prudent decision makers will not plunge into any such second position and the first position caps its exposure, prudently.
With that specific context in mind, Gary, how would you in general define, "Socialism?"
Specifically - In Ramsey where I live the mayor and a trioka of GOP council members making up a majority spent down reserves in ways I believe showed a profligate disregard for fiscal good sense.
Covering their tracks by chest-beating over not raising the tax rate, they nonetheless were spending in ways I believe a true conservative would fault.
Republicans. Yes, they did not raise the general tax rate, but there is an EDA, an HRA, each doing taxing, and I do not see any conservative will in town to curb that kind of thing - to trim back on back-door ways to waste cash.
I credit the city officials, so far, for keeping to a precedent. Past councils wisely have told James Norman, when city administrator NO on a port authority (there being no port in Ramsey being of no consequence to his aims). That guy caucused DFL, I admit that, and he is the one convicted of six felony municipal credit card abuse counts in his latest former job, as city manager of Albert Lea.
Decision making in Ramsey has been bipartisan stupid.
Ramsey had a long-time mayor who was often reelected but disliked strongly by some. I am blogging the "Do you miss me yet," thing about him and the current GOP "brain-trust."
Handing that back to your people is in a sense personally rewarding.
BOTTOM LINE: There is a gang of four, all Republicans, on the seven person Ramsey council that is contemplating putting the city into as much as an eight million dollar hole to take a second mortgage position on a building deal of dubious merit, brought in by a consultant who's been burning through city money like Sherman through Georgia (Sherman had a purpose, however). Again, these are Republicans.
The consultancy that is getting all the city loot handed it has Mike Jungbauer on staff titled as some kind of water expert. Curiously, Jungbauer had begun sponsoring special pork for Ramsey, roughly from about the time that firm got its first consultancy deals, a bit after the consultancy started. Other SD 48 municipalities have not so benefited from the Senator's my-pork-is-good-pork largess with State monies.
With things like that, is it your contention the GOP in things is as pure as Ceasar's wife? That all problems on the planet are tracable to one party, and not to the dilemma of the two party system with lots of spoils to be had? Think it over.
The Real Race Taking Shape
This FNC article seems to indicate that Gov. Perry's entry into the presidential sweepstakes will be soon. Here's the leading indicator:
The implosion of Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign frees up Perry's political wingmen, Dave Carney and Rob Johnson, now said to be headed to Austin to prepare a Perry run. Also this week, sources say Perry got the thumbs up from the Texas moneymen whose support he sought before launching a campaign. A big piece in the Wall Street Journal also helped convince the team that there was East Coast interest in the Texan's candidacy.
With experienced operatives like Mssrs. Carney and Johnson, coupled with "the thumbs up from the Texas moneymen", I'd argue that Gov. Perry has plenty of time to build an organization, raise money and dramatically change the dynamics of this race.
In fact, I don't think it'd take long for him to join Tim Pawlenty as the two favorites to win the GOP presidential nomination. Mitt Romney leads in most polls. There's alot of intrigue in the shiny object media with Rudy Giuliani or Donald Trump, too.
The serious people who will decide the winner understand that Tim Pawlenty and Rick Perry are the true options to defeat President Obama in 2012.
This week's big story from the campaign trail has been the "Newtiny" within the Gingrich campaign. Most serious pundits now think Newt's campaign is a dead man walking. It's difficult to argue with that.
That said, pundits haven't said that Mitt's a dead man walking yet. The polls notwithstanding, Mitt's presidential campaign ended with Romneycare. When Mitt started talking about MMGW, that set his feet in cement. When Mitt refused to back away from his MMGW statements, that set his feet in thicker cement.
Those statements might help Mitt connect with the Lindsey Graham/Susan Collins wing of the GOP but they'll also cripple him with regards to Main Street Republicans.
At the end of the day, Rick Perry and Tim Pawlenty represent the mainstream of Republican Party/TEA Party politics. If either man gets the nomination, I expect their messages to resonate with voters. I'd further add that they would become the favorite to defeat President Obama.
This race is just taking shape but I'd argue that what's happening now isn't making President Obama's advisers happy. In fact, I'd bet that it's causing lots of heartburn at Team Obama HQ.
Posted Saturday, June 11, 2011 10:36 AM
Comment 1 by eric z at 15-Jun-11 08:45 AM
What state is he from? Is he the Texas guy? What's he done that makes him think he's presidential. Being from Texas and named Bush is one thing. This is another.
Response 1.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Jun-11 09:16 AM
Rick Perry is Texas' governor. His state has created the most jobs since the recession ended by a substantial margin. He's signed a raft of reforms that've reduce health care costs, too. Texas' economy is growing without raising taxes. Other than that, he's just an empty suit.
If he gets into the race, be prepared to call him President Perry.
Comment 2 by eric z at 15-Jun-11 09:10 AM
Does "MMGW" mean "mainly mimicking George W."?
I can see how that would put a lot of people off.
You right-wingers are now speaking in code.
Will speaking in tongues be next?
Help me. Explain the cypher.
Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 15-Jun-11 09:19 AM
MMGW = Man-Made Global Warming
PS- Conservatives have used that acronym for almost a decade.
Comment 3 by eric z at 15-Jun-11 05:00 PM
Thanks Gary. I could find no in-article hint or context.
It's new to me.
I was thinking a range, modern military global warfare, is one I can see myself not liking.
Money managed, gold withheld - Ron Paul would like that investigated, see who's withholding.
Massachusetts miracle governed welfare; I can see that being a GOP anathema.
Many men giving willingly, as a taxation unlikelihood.
Thanks again.
Comment 4 by eric z at 15-Jun-11 05:02 PM
Mad Michele's gay wedding.
The possibilities are endless.
Dayton's Shutdown Was Pre-planned
Let there be no mistake about this. The Dayton administration has planned a government shutdown in his effort to raise taxes. Michael Brodkorb sent me this information highlighting the Dayton administration's plan to shut government down:
From conversations in staff meetings at DHS, I am completely convinced that Dayton's plan to shut down the state was designed long before any budget discussions began .
Yesterday when we were being apprised of the potential for a shut down, the words that were used said volumes. For example, the threat of a shut down, and or shut down furthers the agenda (safe to say 'political agenda' to increase taxes on the highest earners?) and in another mtg, something to the effect of 'capitalizing on the chaos' was said, chaos created by the Dayton administration. When I repeated that back to the speaker (one of the managers) she didn't disagree but said that the angst that is being created will prompt people to call their [legislators] which she thought was part of the plan.
It's apparent that Gov. Dayton wants to shut the government down. That's the only way Minnesotans will accept higher taxes. (That isn't saying they'll accept higher taxes. It's saying that that's the only way they'll accept higher taxes.)
The Republicans' budget is a sane budget. It funds Main Street's priorities without raising taxes.
Gov. Dayton's ex-wife and his special interest allies understand that they can't survive under a limited government model. To the DFL, this is an existential fight. With that desperation comes desperate action plans. That's what this shutdown is about.
That's why the DFL is fighting the Republicans' budget with lies and astroturfed advertising campaigns. Their astroturfed advertising campaign against key legislators isn't based on promoting a pro-growth agenda. Here's the transcript for Gov. Dayton's astroturfed advertising campaign :
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.
First, there aren't "drastic cuts to education and health care." The DFL's lies are demolished by the fact that the Republicans' budget includes spending increases for the K-12, Higher Education and HHS budgets . Next, the Republicans' budget will put pro-growth policies in place, policies that grow jobs without annual infusions of government debt. Finally, Gov. Dayton's budget doesn't protect the middle class because they'll get hit with pay freezes, smaller employer contributions to their health insurance plans or layoffs.
Each day, Gov. Dayton tells the sycophant media that the Republicans' budget is barbaric. This email is proof that is salivating waiting for this shutdown, a shutdown they've planned. That's a far cry from Gov. Dayton's exhortation from his State of the State Address:
It is absolutely unthinkable that we would even contemplate doing so here in Minnesota. So, I ask you, legislators; I invite you; I implore you, to join with me now, right here in our Capitol and pledge to the people of Minnesota that we will NOT shut down their government, our government, not next July 1st, not any July 1st, not any day ever.
Gov. Dayton, promise Minnesotans that you won't shut the government down just to shove your unwanted tax hike down Minnesotans' throats. Gov. Dayton, I urge you, I implore you, live up to your exhortation. Don't shut government down like you've planned.
Republicans passed their budget bills by late March. The GOP leadership immediately extended an invitation to Gov. Dayton to help craft the final budget. Gov. Dayton refused, saying that he wouldn't participate until the conference committee reports had been finished. More than once, I asked why he wasn't taking advantage of this opportunity.
It's now apparent why Gov. Dayton didn't take that opportunity. Gov. Dayton and his political allies are, in their minds, fighting an existential fight for big government and high taxes.
When people find out that the GOP budget increases spending, they're no longer angry with Republicans. Instead, their reaction is 'I didn't know that.' That leads most people to take a positive view of the GOP budget.
The DFL spent time carefully laying the groundwork for this impending shutdown, dutifully reciting their talking points. Lies like the imaginary "Republicans' all-cuts budget" and the ever popular "protecting the richest 2%" and other favorite DFL boogeymen.
Gov. Dayton doesn't want compromise. He wants a shutdown. That's why he vetoed the final 9 budget bills. He's vetoed the Republicans' responsible budget because he's obsessed with shutting government down so he gets his tax increase.
This email is proof of that.
Posted Sunday, June 12, 2011 12:09 PM
No comments.
Wisconsin Tactics Visit Minnesota
When union zombies interrupted the Special Olympics event hosted by Gov. Walker, my first thought was how similar this was to the scene after the marriage amendment debate. First, let's recap what happened during the Special Olympics event:
In front of the Capitol today, protesters dressed as zombies stood between Governor Scott Walker and the group of Special Olympics participants he was honoring.
Frankly, these protesters' actions are beyond disgusting. The idiots protesting are vile pieces of human excrement or lower. They couldn't care less what the situation is. Their only concern is whether they can be total jerks or worse in making a point.
Next, let's recall what happened after the marriage amendment debate:
What became unnerving was that last night as we moved closer to the vote they got louder and faster. There was one woman who screeched every time the main doors opened. Made me long for a pair of socks. It was an experience I will remember a long time. Especially seeing the backs of the state troopers-as they lined up shoulder to shoulder to keep the crowd from touching us. And the screaming, 'Shame! Shame!' at us.
Doesn't really go with earlier in the evening when they were singing Amazing Grace, and shouting 'No Hate'. Of course, they seemed to think it was perfectly loving to scream 'Bigot' 10 inches from my face and spit on one of the other reps. (By the way, he has MS, walks with a cane and is a little slower. No hate, right?)
Gov. Dayton promised that Wisconsin wouldn't come to Minnesota. Then again, he promised that he wouldn't shut state government down, either. We know where that's heading, don't we?
The reality is that Gov. Dayton won't criticize the thug tactics of his union allies. After all, they invested millions of dollars so they could win this campaign. God knows he couldn't have done it without his ex-wife's financing the union thugs' smear campaign .
Here's part of ABM's smear campaign against Tom Emmer:
Settle in high flying corporate executives, because Tom Emmer's Minnesota is going to be more fun than your last trip in a golden parachute. Here in Tom Emmer's Minnesota, we believe that paying for good schools and hospitals is the job of the unwashed masses. That's why the slightly regressive taxes of the past have been replaced by a massively regressive tax code in Tom Emmer's Minnesota.
In Tom Emmer's Minnesota, we don't even care if you have your interns set up post office boxes all over the world to avoid paying your taxes. Even if those funds would go to fund nursing homes and other medical facilities, in Tom Emmer's Minnesota we want nothing to get in the way of the gobs and gobs of money coming your way, not even fair play.
Rest assured, my very rich friend. This isn't just a one-time deal. You can trust that, in Tom Emmer's Minnesota, solid investment in good schools, nursing home facilities, clean lakes, fixing roads or health care for 'regular folk' will never get in the way of your extreme wealth and stealthy tax maneuvering.
According to ABM, corporate executives could expect sacred cow treatment in Tom Emmer's Minnesota. Instead, the union backbone of ABM can expect sacred cow treatment in Mark Dayton's Minnesota. In fact, government would generally be given sacred cow treatment.
Posted Sunday, June 12, 2011 1:45 AM
No comments.
